POLICE COURT, ROTORUA

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume XIV, Issue 1848, 28 May 1885, Page 2

POLICE COURT, ROTORUA

[I'ROit OTTB, OWN COMIESPONBEKT.] James Robert Mcßeth vfas thought up on remand, on Monday last, before John ICerr, Esq.. J.P., and charged with having no visible means of support, to which he pleaded "not guilty." Constable Abrahams conducted the prosecution and produced a telegram from the officer in charge of the police at Tauranga, who therein stated that prisoner, together with one Tichborne, apparently his associate, had stopped at the Yorkshire Grey ! Hotel at Tauranga for a whole week, finally ieaving without either of them paying the laudloi'd. The telegram wafi accepted by the 1 Colirt as part evidence. Constable Abrahams next called the f oiiowiug witnesses : — Eobert iting, manage 1 *" of the 3'alace Hotel, Rotorua, deposed that prisoner came to the hotel on the 16th and left on the 18th. He did not say that he was going away, but simply asked for the i'ortd td TatipOj and. then quietly left without paying his bill. Joseph Mcßae, proprietor of the Botornahana Hotel, Wairoa, having been sworn, stated that prisoner arrived there on the evening of the lOtbj and asked for board and lodg* ing, which Was given him, He stayed till the 21st, having previously made arrangements for a native guide to conduct him to the terraces. This deiriand ltd Was likewise unable fco satisfy, and then asked witness (Mr Mcßae) if he had not received a letter to the effect that everything would be right, to which he replied in the negative. Witness further deposed that prisoner then stated he would pay at Napier, adding that he had plenty of friends, and that Mr Ballance was the head of some secretsociety and was using his (prisoner's) brains in the present native policy of the Government. In cross-examination prisoner could not shake this witness' evidence. The native guide was called to depose as to non-payment of fees but the evidence is unimportant. This closed the case and his Worship having commented on the evidence before him, asked the prisoner if he had any explanation to make in extenuation of such discreditable conduct. The latter stated that he was supported by means, the source of which he could not explain in public ; but this did not appear to be quite good enough, and the presiding justice told him that had made up his mind to give him three months' hard labour. Upon urgent appeal by prisoner, however, the Court granted him the privilege given by the Act, and remanded him to gaol for eight days, pending enquiries being made as to his means of support. Failing these to be satisfactory, the above sentence to take effect.