POLICE COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

Auckland Star, Volume XXV, Issue 143, 16 June 1894, Page 5

POLICE COURT.-(THIS DAY.)

(Before Mr H. W. Northcrofb, S.M.)

Larceny.—Arthur Sweto was sentenced to one month's imprisonment with hard labour for having stolen ono pair of shoes, value ss, belonging to John Wm. Dimnock. Alleged Receiving.—Frederick Irwin was chargod with having on the sth of June ab Uargaville received into his possession four pair of boots, two pair 3of shoos and two pairs of slippers, of a total value of £3, belonging to Parker, Green and Co., Wakefield-streot, the defendant at the time well knowing the articles to have been stolen.—Sergeant Gamble asked for a r3mand until the 20th.—Bail was allowed the prisoner, Ijimaelf in £20 and two sureties of £10 each. Destitute Persons Act. — William Skirington was charged with nob providing support for his wife. —Mr Napier appeared for defendant, and said that the wife had left her home and four children, to which it was, however, open to her still to ,return.—Mrs Skivington then told a long story to tho Magistrate alleging that her'huEband had so ill-treated her that slie was afraid to live with him.—ln crossexamination Mrs Skivinyton admitted thab she had once lefb her children ab home for four days while she went to races afc WhangareL She denied having been guilty of wrong conduct. Mr Napier in the course of his remarks admitted chat on two occasions the defendant had, under great provocation, struck his wife. —Mr Northcroft then spoke his mind pretty plainly upon the question of a man raising his hand to a woman under any circumstances. — Ultimately the case was adjourned in the hope that the husband and wife could arrange once more to live together for the sake of the children. Father and Daughter.—Annie Dank was called upon to provide support for her father, William Dank.—Mr C. E. Madden appeared for the father aud Mr W. Thorno for the defendant—Mr Thorne stated that there was a home for the complainanb with his sons in tho country. The daughter had stopped her allowance because her father would not go to live with her brothers. Mr Northcroffc said that when a man had omitted to make provision for hia old age, if bis family offered him a home, as was dono in this case by the sons, ib was the man's duty to accept it, and not Beck for an order against his children.—The case was dismissed.

Mother and Son.— Ernesb Price did not appear and was ordered to contribute 5s per "week towards the support of his mother.