POLICE COURT.—THIS DAY.

Auckland Star, Volume I, Issue 87, 20 April 1870, Page 2

POLICE COURT.—THIS DAY.

(Uelore T. Jtseeitnani, Jisq., Jtt.JU..; ■DETJNKENNESS. S. Hughes, charged with being drunk, was, on the evidence of Detective Murphy, found guilty, and fined 20s and costs, or to be imprisoned for 48 hours with hard labor. Edward Lightfoot, for the same offence, was fined 5s and costs, or to be imprisoned for 48 hours. D. Silverlock and M. Collins, charged with being drunk and disorderly, and A. Chaplain and J. Tackerbury with second offences of drunkenness, were each fined 20s and costs, or to be imprisoned for 48 hours. BREACH OT? LICENSING- ACT. Jacob J. Fernandez was charged by Constable Jackson with a breach of the,3Bth section of the Licensing Act, in selling three dozen bottles of champagne. Mr. Brookfield for the prosecution, Mr. Wynn for the defendant. As it appeared he had sold the goods for his brother, who has a wholesale license, and had done so in mistake, it was ai'gusd that the prosecution should withdraw the charge. Fined Is and costs. BREACH 03? MUNICIPAL POLICE ACT. Peter McLeod was charged by Detective Murphy with a breach of the Municipal Police Act, in having allowed gambling with cards in his refreshment rooms, situated in Victoria-street East, on April 15. Mr. Brookfield for the prosecution, Mr. Eees for the defendant Detective Murphy deposed :I am a detective. I know Ihe house kept by defendant; it is an oyster and refreshment saloon, in Victoria-street East, within the borders of the Municipal Police Act, 1866. Went into the house alone at a quarter-pa3t one on the morning of the 15th. It-was open and lighted up with gas. I saw defendant there, and four men sitting down at a table; the defendant was leaning on the table looking at them. Saw money exchanged at the end of the game. Saw a small pile in centre, and at the close of

the game, one,man put some intb it an * another took some out. Defendant was tli present. When he saw me, lie said " These m hare taken it on themselves to play for lnonev" I then left the house. Returned an hour afti> with detective Ternahan, and saw the Ban nien playing cards, and the defendant m there. Saw money in front of each f them, but saw no money pass. Simeon Foot! and John Connolly were two of those present* By Mr. Kees : Could not say which of them put down and took it up. I believe Fool took it up. It was I believe either sixpence L a shilling. Cannot say wkat game of cards it was. One of the men asked me to have a glass of porter. One of them asked me if? would have a hand. I said to one of them that he had a good pile of silver befove him He said yes, but it had cost him a good pile o f notes. Did not hear defendant say that if they were playing for money they must leave his place. No such words were used to that effect in my presence. Oysters and suppers are sold there. By Mr. Brookfield : Before detective Ter> nahan and I left the house defendant said that if they did not say anything about it he would make it worth their while. - Robert Ternahan deposed : I am a deteo> tive. On the morning of the 15th I accom. panied detective Murphy to the house of de« fendant. Saw defendant and four othen there. Defendant keeps a refreshment-room The men were sitting at the table playinj cards. The defendant was standing at the table. There was money on the table. Some of them picked the money up after we had cone in. Simeon Foote deposed : I am a hawker and general dealer. Recollect being at defendant's early on the morning of the 15th instant. Had gone there on Thursday night, the 14th] about half-past 11, and remained there till nearly 2 o'clock. There were two called Scotty and Connolly, and a man called Mick I proposed a game of "freeze out" for an oyster supper. The game was not over when the detectives came in. I had nearly "freezed" them all out, antl would have won the supper. Defendant was looking on, and said he would not allow gambling. We said we were not gambling, only playing for a supper; and he said, "All right, go on." By Mr. Rees : Did not hear defendant say to Murphy these men have taken on themselves to play for money. By the Court: Sometimes there were seven or eight shillings in the pool. We were not playing for money. The coins were only used for counters. Mr. Rees, for the defence, contended that this was not gambling within the meaning of the Act. That the coins were not intended to pass as money, but simply for the purposes of counting. That they were simply playing for a supper of no value, and such a thing aa was not contemplated in the provisions of the Act against " gaming," which is described as gambling for excessive stakes of money. | Mr. Brookfield, in reply, contended that the supper was a stake for a certain value. The Court, in giving decision, showed hovr even the oysters could be used as counters and representative sovereigns, and under colour of an oyster supper, gamblers might shelter themselves from the police. There was no doubt permission had been given by the defendant. Sentenced to pay a fine of £5 and costs, | but on the request of the prosecution this was reduced to a nominal fine of Is. and costs. ASSAULT. Charles O'Brien was charged with having assaulted W. H. Newton, on Bth April, by striking him with a riding whip, and also with his fist. Mr. Joy appeared for the prosecution, and handed in a medical certificate from Dr. Marshall, showing that the prosecutor was still in a precarious condition from an abscess formed in the jaw, and dangerous to his life. Defendant was ordered to find two sureties of £50 each, to appear on this day week.to answer the charge. Court adjourned from 11.45 to 12.30. ÜBEL. James De Hirsch was charged by Frederick Alexander Whitaker with having falsely, maliciously, and wilfully declared and published in the Thames Advertiser newspaper certain remarks injuriously affecting the character of complainant, on the Bth July and 3lst August, 1869. Mr. Rees and Mr. Joy appeared for the complainant, and Mr. Wynn and Mr. Hesketh for the defendant, for whom they pleaded not guilty. Mr. Roes opened the case for the complainant, and said he would prove to the Court that the libel as alleged to had been, published in the Thames Advertiser of Julyt 1869, was published, to the injury of his client; and also the one published on 31sb August, 1869, at Wellington. The learned counsel then said the Bench would find it difficult to find where the libel consisted unless he gave them a few particulars of the case, and he would therefore state the case to the Bench. Mr. Bees then went into the case fully, going back to the time previous to the alleged, libel. Mr. Wynn several times objected to Mr. Rees' remarks on the case, and on more than one occasion a warm debate took place between the learned gentlemen. Mr. Rees, in his remarks, said it would no doubt be said on the part of his learned friends that the alleged libels had been allowed to stand over too long, but it was thought that the case would have been brought in a civil form before the Native Lands Court, but owing to a private occurrence that occurred in Mr. »6 Hirscli's family, no summons was served in the matter : and for another reason that the original papers were sent for to Welling*ol1 '~ but were not obtainable. [Left sitting.] f >: y