POLICE COURT.— Friday.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XVI, Issue 5358, 18 January 1879, Page 6

POLICE COURT.— Friday.

f Before K. C. Barstaw, Ksq., It.M.j Druxkkkkesh.—On person was punished for being drunk. FKUiT-STKALrNG.—SamueI Gibbons, a boy 12 yearHof age, was charged with stealing peaches, worth Od, from Mrs. Scully's garden, Grafton Road. Mr. Tole appeared for the defence. The boy pleaded guilty ou a previous occasion, aud the Bench should have then Hcntenced hini or disposed of the caae. Fro Hubniitted it was not uow competent for the present Bench to deal with the case. His Worship said lie could not now Hontenco him ordeal with the matter. The jurisdiction was vested in another Bonch. Mr. Tole asked that the boy be discharged, hut the Magistrate said he had no power to grant his discharge, or deal with the case at all. Mr. Tole then said that the boy was not in custody at all. but Mr. Panly submitted that he wub in custody, but, to get out of the difficulty, he would withdraw the charge. Wife Assault.—'Thomas Luke Wohb w:is charged with assaulting uis wife by striking her about the body and eye repeatedly, and otherwise abusing her. Mr. J. J5. Runnel}, who appeared for the accused, asked to have the case adjourned until next day, with a view to Homo arrangement being come to. It wait one of those unfortunate family jars, in which the jar seemed to affect the wife most. An adjournment was granted till Monday, and bail was allowed defendant in bonds of £20 and a auretv of £20.

Deserter.—William Myas was again brought up ou the charge of deserting from IT.M. b. Dido. Mr. Pardy asked for a further remand. Mr. S. Hesketh, who appeared for the defendant, asked by what power those repeated remands were granted. The Magistrate said it was under the 34tb section of the Mutiny Act. Tho remand was granted*

Watek Supply Regulation's. — Charles Hawkeswood was charged with illegally attaching a service-pipe to the city water-supply mains. Mr. Thome, for the defendant, pleaded guilty. Mr. Russell appeared for the Corporation, and said the offence was not a heinous one, but the Corporation, to prevent waste of water, ot.ly permitted licensed plumbers to interfere with the mains. Mr. Hawkeswood made the connection himself. He only asked for the most nominal penalty, as the object of the prosecution was only brought to draw attention to the by-law. Fined 5s and costs.

Assaulting a Husiiand.—Mary Mudford was charged with assaulting John Mudford, her husband, by striking and scratching him, and carrying on this conduct continuously for a month. Defendant admitted having caught him by the hair to prevent hirn from running away. Plaintiff said if she promised to keep away from him he would withdraw the charge, but the Bench pointed out that she could not be required to make such a promise, for her place was with her husband. It was evident that she w.ia afraid he would run away, and so held on tightly to his hair. The Bench allowed the charge to be withdrawn.

Railway Recur, vrioxs : Tiuvellinc; Without a Ticket.—Deborah Hoo<l was charged "vith a_ broach of the Railway Regulations by travelling from Ngaruawhia to Newmarket on the 7th inst. without paying the proper fare. Mr. S. Hesketh, on behalf of the defendant, pleaded not guilty. Mr. Pardy opened the proceedings, the charge being laid under the ijSr-h section of the Public Works Act. He stated the facts which he meant to adduce in evideuce, and called John Sampson, a railway guard on the Waikato Railway, who deposed that he had charge of the afternoon train from Ohaupo to Auckland on the 7th inst. Mrs. Hood was a passenger from Ngaruawahia to Newmarket. He asked to see her ticket, and she said she had a first-class return from Newmarket in her bag, but she did not shew it, and he took her word, and did not issue to h?r a ticket. She got out at Newmarket, and he saw no more of her. Cross-examined : Mrs. Hood never, to his knowledge, travelled by the train of which ha had charge before. George Robertshaw, station-master at Ngaruawahia, deposed that no ticket had been issued to .Mrs. Hood at that station. The station-master at Newmarket, Mr. Holmes, deposed that he did not see Mrs. Hood on the 7th, nor ask her for her ticket. Constable Kelly deposed thas, on the 7th inst., he saw Mrs. Hood in the passenger train. She got out at Newmarket, and the station-master asked her for her ticket. She did not answer the first time, but the second time she looked over her shoulder and said it was a return ticket, and walked away. She left two parcels in Holmes's charge before he asked for the ticket, and he let her walkaway on her verbal statement that she had a ticket. Holmes told him who it was. He said it was Mrs. Hood. Cross-examined : He was just alongside them, and he heard the conversation. Witness carried her two parcels for her until she left them in Holmes's charge, and Holines afterwards told him who the woman was. He saw the name Hood on one of the parcels,—a paper box. A. V. Macdonald, general manager of the Auckland and Waikato railway, deposed : Mrs. H"od had no authority to travel in the train without a ticket. She could only have obtained a ticket at Ngaruawahia station or from the guard of the train. Mr. Hesketh, for the defence, said Mrs. Hood had been in the habit of travelling from Ngaruawahia to Newmarket, and her husband was in the habit of getting her ticket for her, aud she believed that she had it on this occasion. He asked the Bench to hear the second charge before deciding on this one. She was then charged with travelling from Newmarket to Ngaruawahia on the 9th instant without paying the proper fare, and pleaded not guilty. Alexander McDonald, railway guard, was in charge of the goods train on the 9th as far as Mercer, where he handed the train over to another guard. Mrs. Hood got into the train at Newmarket. On getting near Mercer he proffered her some tickets, but she said she had a first-cUss return ticket. Witness did not ask to see it. John Brierly, station-master at Mercer, deposed that when the goods train arrived there on the 9th he saw the defendant. He asked her if she required a ticket, and she replied that she had one. He was quite sure he was not mistaken. Patrick Cox, railway guard, deposed that he took guard of the early goods train to Ohaupo from the first witness. Just after leaving Taupiri he asked Mrs. Hood for her ticket, and she replied that it was in her carpet bag in the van, and she would give it to him at Ngaruaw.iliia. When they reached there he delivered his way-bill to the stationmaster, and she went off to the hotel where she lives. The station-master demandedthe ticket, and he told him what Mrs. Hood had said. He went over tp get the ticket. Mr. Hood was in the bar, and he told him he wanted Mrs. Hood's ticket. Mrs. Hood's brother, who was in the bar at the time, went in for her, and when she came out she ordered Hood to pay for the cook's ticket, and he received 12s 4d for the cook's fare. He then demanded Mrs. Hood's ticket, and the reply she made was that it wan in <l,tbottom of her carpet-bag and she could not get it, but she would send it over to the station-master presently. Mr. Hood did not say auything about having taken a ticket out for her. All through, Mrs. Hood gave him to understand she had a ticket, and he believed she had. Mrs. Hood had never before travelled by any train of which he was guard. George Robertshaw, station-master at Ngaruawahia, said defendant bad never delivered the ticket to him. Mr. Hood spoke to him on Monday, and told him he had done a dirty trick by reporting her. No explanation was over made to him that it was a mistake, and the ticket has never beeu delivered up or the fare paid. It had beeu reported to him that Mr. and Mrs. Hood and their servaut had been in the habit of travelling without paying, and he therefore did not request her to take out tho ticket on the 7th, when she left Ngaruawahia, iu order to see whether thera was any truth in it, aud he brought it under the notice of his superior officer. He had been living in the hotel, but had left because an unpleasantness had arisen on account of the performance of his duty. .Mr. A. Y. Macdonald deposed that on tho 9th iust. Mr 3. Hood had no right to travel in a train without paying, liveu if she had a return ticket, she should have got it re-dated at the Newmarket station, otherwise the officials would not recognise it. J. H. Holmes, station-master at Newmarket, deposed that when the goods train started he was in bed, and Mrs. Hood did not j)rescnt her ticket to be re-dated. For tho defence, Mr. Hesketh urged that there was no concealment or attempt to c-vado payment. He called the defendant, who, in reply to Mr. Hesketh, said that she left Newcastle by the train on the 7th inst., and came down, as she had been in the habit of doing onco a month, to pay the bills. She never got a ticket personally at Newcastle. Mr. Hood always got it, anil put it in her bag with the bills. He did not come across the road with her to the train, but he came immediately afterward, and said everything was right in the bag. I When the guard asked for her ticket, she told him it was in her bag ; that she would be going back the day after to-morrow. She then believed the ticket was in her bag. She was not asked for her ticket at Newmarket when she arrived there. She returned to Newcastle with tho cook, anil when she was asked for her ticket she thought it was in her bag, and when she found on her arrival that her husband had neglected to «et it for her, she stopped the guard and told him so, and offered to pay, but the guard declined to issue a ticket, as it was past the date. This was in the hotel, after she got home, and up to that moment she believed she had a ticket. Cross-examined: She never looked iu her bag up to the time she returned homo to see whether she had her ticket. She was in the habit of travelling frequently. Within tho last three months her husband had taken out tickets for her at Ngaruawahia. Mr. Pardy :Is it not a fact that you have been in the habit of travelling on that line without paying? Mr. Hesketh objected to the question. The Bench ruled that it must bo answered. She was a voluntary wituess. She replied that she had never travelled without paying, but on no occasion had she taken out a ticket herself. Mr. Hesketh said they were unable to find Mr. Mills, the former station-master, who could give important evidence, but Mr. Pardy said if Mr. Hesketh wanted him the police would find him in a few minutes. He was employed at the railway station, and Air. Macdonald would give him authority to come up at once, if Mr. Hesketh was very anxious for him. His Worship ruled that the words "with intent to avoid paying tho proper faro " in the information was surplusage. The offence was complete according to the section, without proving intent. Mr. Hesketh said in the face of that ruling it waa not necessary to wait for Mr. Mills, and ho would rest the case where it was, for as a matter of fact they had to admit that Mrs. Hood did travel without a ticket on the two occasions referred to. The Bench inflicted in i each case a fine of £5 and costs. Mr. Hesketh, on the question of costs, said that, had it not been for tho words used in the information, they would have pleaded guilty, for the only ground of defence was that thero was no intent to evade payment. Mr. Pardy said all he asked for each witness was 8s to pay for their lodgings. lie did not ask their travelling expenses, as they were brought down from Ngaruawahia free of cost. The costs were allowed.—A similar charge was then preferred against Alice Yolluiid, tho cook, who accompanied Mrs. Hood to Ngaruawahia. Mr. Hesketh, for defendant, pleaded guilt}', and pointed out that tho fare was paid at the end of the journey. The Inspector said that Mrs. Hood, who had employed the defendant, spoko for both, had represented that they had tickets, and it was only on following them to the hotel that the second-class faro was paid. He had no doubt tho defendant was under tho impression that Mrs. Hood had arranged for her passage, and might have boon quite innocent. Tho Manager had no wish to press for a conviction, and, with the permission of tho Bench, the charge would be withdrawn. Permission was granted, and the chargo withdrawn. Another Assault. — Antony Martin was charged with assaultiug Christopher Greenway. Mr. J. B. Russell, who appeared for defendant, ' asked for an adjournment for a week ; and Mr. 1 Greonway, who appeared for prosecutor, consented. The remand was granted.