POLICE COURT—THIS DAY.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIII, Issue 111, 12 May 1902, Page 4

POLICE COURT—THIS DAY.

(Mr H. W. Brabant, S.M.)

Drunkenness. —For this offence on^ first offender was convicted and dv;. charged, while two first offehllers, who did not appear, had each to forfeit 10/. Nicholas Crawford was fined 5/, of 24 hours in default.

Refusing to Quit.—James Ale^ander Ferguson and Benjamin Kartell were charged with drunkenness, and' with refusing to leave the Criterion Hotel, when requested to do so. In each case a fine of 5/ or 24 hot_r s iv default was imposed on the first y1 charge, and a fine of 10/ or 48 hours ' in default on. the second.

A Case for the Costley Home.—Aa old man named John lmpet Whiteford appeared to answer a charge ot vagrancy. Sub-Inspector Mitchell told His Worship that the charge was only brought to prevent tie old s man dying in the. street, as he was' quite without money or friends. fife had been wandering about , tfte wharves, and was quite inoffensive. He was evidently suffering. front senile decay. The old'man promised to stay at the Costley Home If sent there, and His Worship accordingly discharged him, on the understanding that he would be sent to that institution. i: .

Remanded for Medical Examination, —An elderly man named Henry Surrey pleaded guilty to a charge of vagrancy. Constable Skinner said that the man had been hanging round tbe wharves for some six* months. He had done no work, and got his food by begging from cooks on hoard " vessels in port. He was n ablebodied man, but witness considered that he was mentally weak. His Worship remanded the man for three days for medical examination.

Discharged.—A 3 roung man named Robert Cashmore Moller -vyas charged with assaulting Helena Marsh on February 27th, thereby causing her actual bodily harm, and with robbing. Helena Marsh of the sum of £1 6/. The prosecution was a private one, and the case had twice been adjourned. When the case was called there was no appearance of prosecutor or ■■ prosecutor's solicitor, and Sub-Inspec-tor MitchellfTfnformed His Worship that she was in gaol on remand on a charge of theft. Mr Martin, who appeared for Moller, asked that his . client be discharged, as the charge' had been hanging over him for some time. His Worship discharged defendant.

Dismissed. —Alfred de Groven was charged with frequenting and using Queen-street on April 24th for the purpose of betting. Mr Martin appeared for defendant, who pleaded not guilty. Evidence giyen by Constable Moriarty went to ~9t w thaii defendant was standing ~'in fQd_efS_i ' street on the day in question, and wasy seen to receive money from a man,y and at, the same time make a note o% ■ a card. Mr Martin submitted thai y there was no evidence of a bet hay* ing taken place, and that therefor*:?, there was no case to answer. His Worship said he could not convict .on.; the evidence, and dismissed the information.

Breach of By-laws.—Frederick Waller was fined 10/ and costs for riding, a horse at other than a walking pace ; round the.corner of .Symonds-street ~ and Kyber.Pass-road. • • ; '

A Stowaway.—Allan Nevin was convicted of travelling onVthe s.s. Zealandia, from Sydney to Auckland without paying his fare, with intent to defraud, and was fined £3 17/, the amount of the fare, or one montnV imprisonment in default.

An Infant Case. —A married woman named Kate Hammond was charged! with committing a breach of the Infants' Life Protection Act, in that she ■ received into her care, in consideration of certain payment, an infant, she not being registered as a keeper sofa- -home- under the Act. Mr Martin appeared for defendant, who pleaded not guilty. The evidence of the mother of the child was to the effect that Mrs Hammond replied tp an advertisement inserted by her with, reference, to her child, and Mrs Hammond .agreed, to take the child at so much-a week. Constable Dunne stated that defendant told him that an agreement .had been entered into. The defence, was that defendant, who knew of the provisions of the law on the point, took the child temporarily; to oblige the mother. There was no agreement s^uch as the mother spoke" of, ..he understanding being that if. the mother could get an order against the putative father of thechild defendant's charge 'would be s[> a week, provided, of course, that she could get a license. The mother allowed the child to remain at defend* ant's house for four weeks, and no claim had been made against her' The advertisement inserted by/th* mother was for the adoption of tit. child, and defendant agreed to sddpfr it for £40. Evidence was given in support of the defence by defendant. His Worship "said it seemed ,to'ts?| that a breach of the Act had taken place, but he would adjourn the csM& till to-morrow to allow the girlj-(whfc had been taken ill in Court) to h» further examined