POLICE COURT

Evening Star, Issue 19518, 28 March 1927, Page 2

POLICE COURT

« MONDAY, MARCH 28. {Before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M.) STATEMENT VERIFIED. Joseph George Shaw was chared on remand that, having incurred a liability for 10s with the Public Works Depart ment, he obtained credit by fraud This case had been adjourned to en able the accused to verify his statement that moneys wore due to his fathei from the department. Chief-detective Cameron said that in quiries had been made, ami it had been found that accused had left an allotment of £4 5s 6d in favor of his father. The Magistrate said that he would take into consideration the fact that accused had been working, and that money was duo to him. Accused had placed himself in a serious position He might have been charged with forgery. It was a stupid act. The charge would be dismissed, subject to the_ 10s being repaid. In view of the dismissal no order would be mad© for the suppression of accused’s name. A MEAN THEFT. An elderly man named Charles Price pleaded guilty to the theft of £2, the property of John M'Lood. Senior-sergeant Quartemain _ said that accused and M‘Leod went into a second-hand shop; the latter taking off his vest and placing it on the counter. While it was there the accused took the money from one of the pockets. Accused said he was under the influence of liquor at the time. The police said that accused was a fairly good worker, but was addicted to drink.

His Worship remarked that he did not wish to send accused to gaol. He would bo fined £3, in default one month’s imprisonment, on condition that he took out a prohibition order and repaid the £2 stolen. A fortnight was allowed in which to pay. REMANDED. Alexander Thompson was charged that on March 26 he assaulted Thomas Joseph Hanley so as to cause him actual bodily harm; also that he behaved in a disorderly manner in George street on the , same date and occasion. The Senior Sergeant said that this was a case of stabbing. The doctor reported that the wound was not a serious one at present, but there was a possibility of it becoming septic. For this reason a remand was asked for. Accused: He tried to choke me The Magistrate: I don’t want to go into the facts just now. I propose to grant the remand asked for. Are you agreeable? Accused: Oh, yes. The Senior Sergeant said there was no possibility of accused obtaining bail, nnd a remand was granted until April 4. •BREACH OF ORDER. Phillip Gordon Sutherland was charged with having entered licensed premises while prohibited. The Senior Sergeant said that Sutherland had already served seven _ days’ imprisonment in connection with a charge of disorderly behaviour, and as the present charge arose out of this previous charge the police had no desire to press for further punishment. Mr C. J. L. White, who appeared for the accused, said that it was a question of what effect a conviction would have on Sutherland’s probation. Counsel suggested that the matter might_ be held over without a conviction being entered. The Senior Sergeant said that the probation officer (Mr J. Garbuit) stated that a conviction would have no effect on accused’s probation. Accused was convicted and discharged. , CATTLE DRIVING. Alexander Scott, charged with having driven cattle through the streets during prohibited hours, was convicted, no penalty being imposed. MAINTENANCE CASES.

Travers Swift, charged with disobedience of maintenance orders, did not appear, and was sentenced to two months’ imprisonment on one information and one month on a second, the defendant to be released on payment of the arrears, £l9 2s 6d and £3 15s . respectively, with £1 10s costs.

Jzmea Meek was charged with failure to maintain his wife and children, a complaint being brought by the wife for separation, maintenance, and guardianship on the grounds of cruelty. Mr C. J. L. White was for the complainant and Mr E. J. Anderson for the defendant.—Plis Worship said it was clear that the parties could not live together. It was only a question of what was best to be_ done for the children. Ho would adjourn the case in order to allow Mr Lock (juvenile probation officer) to see the parents and arrange something.—After an adjournment Mr Lock reported that satisfactory arrangements had been made in regard to the eldest child.— The Magistrate therefore made an order for separation, with maintenance at 2os per week, the wife to have custody or the two younger children, the elder son to be under the charge of the child welfare officer, and the husband to pay los per week, towards the maintenance of the eldest son. The husband to have reasonable access to the children. Jas. Gilligan, charged with disobedience of maintenance order, did not appear, and was sentenced to fourteen days’ imprisonment, to be released on payment of arrears. Mr H. C. Barrowdough appeared for complainant.