THE COURTS-TO-DAY.

Evening Star, Issue 12873, 24 July 1906, Page 4

THE COURTS-TO-DAY.

CITY POLICE COURT.

(Before G. Cniicksbaak, Esq., S.M.)

Drunkenness.—Two first offenders were convicted and discharged. Theft.— James Ireland was charged -with stealing a waterproof cape, valued £l, the property of George M'Lcan. He pleaded guilty.—Chief Detective Herbert said that accused was by a man who had been removing some furniture for the Hon. George M'Lean. Accused obtained possession of the cape, aiid refused to return it, even when requested to do so, and was only persuaded to relinquish it when arrested.—Accused wae convicted and sentenced to seven days' imprisonment with hard labor.

Sly Grog-selling.—Alexander Lcckio -was charged with that he did on tbo 17th June, in Main street, Kensington., unlawfully sell certain alcoholic liquor within the meaning of the Licensing Act, 1881. without being licensed. Mr .7. P. M. Fra.ser appeared for the prosecution, and Mr A. 0. Hanlon for the defendant.—Mr Fraser said that defendant was a small storekeeper and rabbitskin dealer; On Sunday, the 17th of June, Sergeant Conn saw a number of men enter defendant's fitore, and amongst otheis one Patrick Lynch. The oflicer followed Lynch, and found the place in darkness. He struck a match, and discovered eleven men there. Seme were sitting down, and others were

standing. The sergeant said to defendant: "You JiTe doing a good business here," and then left. A (onstabkr- placed on duty afterwards sa.w Lynch come- out of defendant's shop with two bottles in his pocket. .Lynch walked along a littlo way, and then took a drink out of one of tho bottles. Tho constable spoko to nhn, and from the facts elicited the present prosecution was laid. —Sergeant Conn gave evidence in accordance with Mr Prater's statement.—Patrick Lynch said he remembered meeting Constable Murray one Sunday evening, when he (witness*) had two bottles of beer in his possession. He got tliem at Ijeclsie's, and paid 3s for thorn. Ho took both bottles home with him. Ciossocamined: Witness was addicted to uiink, and was "on the bxir^t" in June. He had not a very keen recollection of any. of the evente which happened at that time. He could not swear that he got the liquor from Leckie on the evening of tbo 17fh June. His memory was always bad, and, of cfltuce, got worse when be drank. Reexamined: He did not know whether Constable Murray asked him where he got the beer.—Constable Murray gave evidence verifying tlie allegations of the prosecution, and in exens-examinatkm said that a. week after the date'in question the police searched tho premises, but; found no liquor.-—Mr Hanlon eaid this r-as a pretty case for the prosecution. The . police had succeeded in laying their information on the evidence of a'drunken man, who could not say when he bought the liquor or when he paid for ir. He submitted that the evidence was practically uncorroborated. It »vas absurd, too, to imagine that defendant was going to allow a man to go away from his premises with two bottles of beer exposed, immediately on the heels of in policeman. s?hen a search was made of the premises no liquor was found on them. It was peculiar that that fact was not brought out by the prosecution. Not even the usual few empty bottles were found. The only evidence worth anything was that of the policeman who saw Lynch coming away from the shop with two bottles in his possession. The likely explanation of that was that Lynch had" the bottles on him when he went into the shop.—-Defendant, in giving evidence, said he sold cigarettes and tobacco at his shop. There was a room behind hii shop, and on the date mentioned in the information there were several people in that room. Lynch was not there when the sergeant came in. He came Ln some time 3f ter the sergeant, and only stayed a few minutes. He sold Lynch no bear, and saw no bottles in his pockets. He had no beer on his premises on the 17th June. .He swore positively that he did hot sell Lynch beef at any time._ There was no, troth in Lynch's statement that he. gave witness three shillings for two bottles 6f beer. Crossexahimed : He did a fairly large trade in cigarettes aind tobacco on Sunday nights. I/vnch did hot ask for beef when.lie came in. He drank a bottle of' hop beef and then went away. Had neither bonght beer nor paid, anybody oise to do so within the test three months. The present prosecution looked like a conspiracy on the part of the police. There was a mistake somewhere. Re-exarnihed : The police had made a search of his premises oh two occasions, but had fotmd no Iknror {here.—His Worship agreed with "the rffosecafiionj and fisaed jUfeAtet £25,. and

fault one months', imprisoirroenfc.— fit Hanlon asked Hi* Wbrimip -.to draw up his conviction and file it in the Supreme Court. ...... Bain sued Thomas Guthrie for the support of her, iDegitimato child,-of which .she alleged defendant was the fatlier. -Mr John Wilkihsari ap. peared for plaintiff; Mr Hanlon 'for" defendant—After a certain amount of eyi. denco for the plaintiff had beeri beard Mi Hahltfri ititiniated, on behalf of his client; that lie would c'oiisent to' an order oniric' Worship madman order for the payment of ,£f is 8d 6h the aid of each month. Uefendatit was aISO ordered to pay £4 hlaternity expetsps, with £2 2s prbfessiorial fees an"f £1 6d witnesses' expense!. (Left sitting.)