POLICE COURT

Evening Star, Issue 19044, 12 September 1925, Page 9

POLICE COURT

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 12,

(Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.)

LORD, BUT NOT MASTER. The matter of Charles Henry Lord, charged with disobedience of a maintenance order, was again before the court. Mr Irwin appeared for complainant (the wife), and the arrears were stated as £402 2s.

Complainant said it was four years since she had last seen her husband. The latter’s statement that there had been trouble over the third child was false, as was that of her having refused maintenance money offered by defendant. She had been working all this while and keeping the three children,. Defendant had been living with other women, arid she did not want him back. He had been a land agent when she met him, but la tor went into a wine and spirit business, lost his money, and got into trouble. His Worship pointed out to defendant that he was liable to six months’ imprisonment, and asked whether he had any proposal _to make. Defendant said he was willing to go back to his wife. The Magistrate: That is no use. Have yon any other proposal? Complainant suggested the payment of £IOO and a fan- rale of maiuten-' ance. 'His Worship sentenced defendant to six mouths’ imprisonment, the warrant to he suspended so long as ho paid £2 10s a week—£2 on the order and. 10s off the arrears. WORKING MAX’S LAPSE. Remanded from Thursday on a charge of committing a grossly indecent act in the Queen’s Gardens, Ernest Edwards appeared for sentence. The man was on Thursday jointly charged with a woman, who had been sentenced to one month’s imprisonment. Excellent testimonials from former employers and others, said the Magistrate, had been received regarding Edvards, who was apparently a hardworking man, and, apart from the present lapse, was apparently of good character. As the man had been in custody, no further punishment would he inflicted. “ But let fids he a lesson to you, Edwards,” remarked the Magistrate in convicting accused and ordering him to come up for sentence within twelve months. A PARENT WARNED.

“ One of the most glaring cases of parental indifference that lias come under my notice for some time,” remarked the truant ollicer of two charges against Basil Gomlio of being the parent of a boy who had failed to attend George Street SehooL there wore previous convictions against accused.

Mr 15, S. Irwin, who appeared for the defendant, said that he would not attempt to justify the accused’s action in not ensuring that the hoy attended school. He hud impressed upon the man that if he himself was not there to son that the hoy vent to school, then he must see that his wife attended to the matter. Remarking that the prosecution had been taken not so much to punish the defendant as in the interests of the son, the Magistrate said that if tlm boy did not attend school lie did net get his chance in life. In the present instance the defendant would he merolv convicted and fined ds on each charge, with costs, but if there were any future charges defendant would receh'o a substantia! penalty. ])HIG\KI'NXK;Gd. A first offender for drunkenness, wli ; did not appear, was fined 20s, in default forty-right hours’ imprisonment.