POLICE COURT

Evening Star, Issue 18334, 23 July 1923, Page 1

POLICE COURT

Monday, July 23. (Before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M.) DRUNK OR NOT? Benjamin Barker, who had been granted a. remand for the purpose of securing legal assistance to defend a charge of drunkenness, said ho had been unable to obtain the services of a lawyer, but would plead not guilty. Sergeant. Turner’s cvidcr.ce was to the effect that on the night of the 19th he saw Barker “ drinking oysters out of a bottle” in Machggan street-. Defendant was unsteady, smelt strongly of liquor, and talked nonsense. Constable Maephcrson arrested him a few minutes later. On being searched at the station, a mutton bird was also found upon him.

Defendant: But no whisky or intoxicating liquors? Witness: Only inside. Constable Macpherson gave evidence. Defendant : You were the, gentleman who picked me up in High street and put me in a cab? Witness: It was a taxi.

Defendant: No; it was a cab with a bay horse, and it was driven by a man named Oleary.

Constable Watkins also gave- evidence, slating that defendant was so drunk ho had to be carried in by the constable and (lie taxi driver. _ ( Defendant persisted that he had been brought in a. hansom cab, and the Magistrate 3 said that a man who thought ho had been brought in a cab, and was actually brought in ,a, taxi, could not have been sober. Defendant would be fined 40s, in default seven days' imprisonment. Ills Worship warned Barker that if ho came up again he would get a term of imprisonment-. MAINTENANCE. Harry Alfred Jenkins was proceeded against on a complaint by his wife (for whom Mr Mooro appeared) for a maintenance order.—Complainant, in his evidence, said that she had received no money from her husband, from whom she tad boon legally separated, since March, and ho had written stating he did not intend to pay her any more. —Mr Mooro said defendant earned about £7 a week, but drank heavily.—An order was made for £2 per week for the maintenance of complainant and her child, with £lO past maintenance and £3 3s costs. The wife of James William Davidson Richmond appeared to support a complaint against him for disobedience of an order for the maintenance of herself and two children. The arrears In this case wer set down at £l32,—Complainant said that her husband got away every now and again, and the police could not find him. The order was for 30s a. week. Sho did not know where, ho was at present.— Defendant was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment in Auckland Prison. His Worship added that some arrangement might be made in the, way of an allotment order. Francis Clarence Watson and William John Watson (Air Irwin) were charged with disobedience l of a. maintenance order made against- them in respect of their father (Mr Anderson). The arrears in each case were £2 15s. —Alice Lockhart, a daughter, with whom ,the father lived, said that the latter received £SB 10s from the sale of a. property.—Cross-examined, witness said that her father went to the pictures two or three limes a week, and to the football match; surely ho could have a little, pleasure!—Mr Irwin: My reason for asking is that, it was stated when (he order was made that he was so blind he could see nothing.—Defendant F. C. Watson gave an account of his ca-ni-nings.—Cross-examined, he said ho had a launch worth £.1.80, but- had been unable to sell it. At any rate, he wished to put the- proceeds into a home for himself and wife.—Defendant W. J. Watson also gave evidence. He had a little property, but it was mortgaged. He was earning £6 a, week', but- had a wife and three children. —The Magistrate: You. state you arc hopelessly bankrupt Is that correct?—l owe £537, and have only the equity on my properly.—His Worship said that there was apparently some feeling between the brothers and the sister. Since (ho order had been made a. property winch was then said to lie unsaleable, had realised £SB 10s, and tint was available for the maintenance of the father, together with (he 12s 6d contributed by two other members of the family. ' The information would be dismissed, and no order would be made until the £OB 10s was exhausted. BY-LAW CASE. John Watkins, for failing to carry a registered number on his motor cycle, was fined 10s, with costs. DRUNKENNESS. John Robinson Melvin, .vho did not appear, was fined the amount of his bail (20s), in default twenty-four hours’ im- % prisonment, on a- cha-rg" of drunkenness.