POLICE COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXV, Issue 202, 24 August 1904, Page 5

POLICE COURT.

THIS DAY. (Before Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M.) Drunkenness: Patrick Sullivan, a drunkard, who was convicted for the second time within six months, had two pleas for leniency. One was that unless he was allowed to leave Auckland that day he -would lose his return ticket, and the other that he had never appeared previously before Mr. Kettle. His Worship smiled at the latter pica, and n'tied the ingenious defendant 10/ and costs. Similar fines were imposed upon James Smith and Patrick Murphy, while two first offenders were fined 5/ each, and another convicted and discharged.

Sunday Traders Fined: Robert Woodside, who was defended by JVJr. Batnford, pleaded not guilty to keeping hie premises open for trading on Sunday, August 14, at lii.-i shop in Queen-street. The evidence of ?er#t. Hanson was that he saw people going in and out of the shop frequently, and close, to the door was a rack containing aerated waters. Mrs. Woodside was called as a witness for tho defence, and she admitted that soft drinks were served in the shop, and that they were exposod for sale. Only drinks wWe sold, and it was necessary to keep open the shop door, af this was the only entrance to the restaurant. His Worship remarked that tjjps witness helped to prove the ease, and he. fine.d Woodside £ 1 and costs. Margaret Roth and Florence M. Thatcher, two other .shopkeepers from the same neighbourhood, were aleo fined £ 1 each and costs for tjunday trading. By-laws Broken: Peter I'Yanehi -was fined 5/ and costs amounting to 7/ for leaving a vehicle uuattended in Queeustre.et, and similar penalties were imposed upon William Foster for driving ■i vehicle around the corner of Albert and Customs streets at greater than a walking pace, and upon Andrew Je.bri?!. who admitted having ridden a. bicyde on the Victoria Wharf, Devonport. A Prisoner's Complaint.—One of the drunkard- , , a first-offender, named Frederick Thomas, complained tliat ho was trresti'd in his own house, and was not ■therefore guilty of being drank in a public place/" He alleged that Constable Finlayson, who was called to the houbf by the landlady, told him he was wanted., and he followed the officer into the street, thinking he. was under arretst. Constable Pinlayuon'R evidence was that he was called into the. house because of Thomas* violence, aud he did] not in any way persuade the defendant to go into the street. This statement was corroborated by the person who had called him to the house, and the stipendiary expressed himse,lf as satisfied that the constable did not take Thomas oui of Hie house. Defendant whs fined 5/ nml costs.