POLICE COURT.—SATURDAY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XVI, Issue 5509, 14 July 1879, Page 6

POLICE COURT.—SATURDAY.

[Before R. C. Barstow, Esq.. R.M.] Drunkenness.—Two persons were fined for this offence. Rogue and Vagabond.—William Hoyes was charged with a breach of tho Vagrant Act, by being a rogue and a vagabond, by begging for alms on the Remuera Road, and having been previously convicted as an idle and disorderly person. Prisoner, a young man, pleaded guilty to the chargo. His Worship said there wer<i several charges of stealing against the prisoner. Ho must take three months' imprisonment, with hard labour. Stealing from the Person. — Minnie Bnrke was charged with stealing the sum of £12 10s from the person of Dennis Gleeson. On the application of Mr. Pardy, the case was remanded until Tuesday. Selling Drink on Sunday.—Tho ease against Andrew Fernandez, for a breach of the Licensing Act, by selling drink on Sunday, which was remanded for the purpose of obtaining a witness, was resumed. Mr. Hesketh for the defence. John Edwards deposed that he was in defendant's houso on the day in question. He went to get a drink, but did not get one. He did not see Fernandez drawing any beer. This being tho evidence, Mr. Hesketh addressed tho Court for tho defence. He thought the prosecution had failed to make out their case. There was no evidence to Bbew that any drink was supplied. It was only supplied to a lodger. His Worship said this lodger business was becoming a common excuse. Andrew Fernandez deposed that he remembered Hudspeth coming to his hotel on the day in question. He did not supply him with any liquor. The glass of brandy that the oon-

stable saw belonged, to. a lodger named James Watt He did not.-draw any beer. Cross-examined by Mr. Pardy : It was not Hudspeth who put the : brandy ia the glass. ■ He 'would not lot the constable taste the brandy beoausa it was the lodger's. His Worship Baid, after hearing . Mr. Fernan-. dez's evidence, he must dismiss the casei, although there were very strong suspicions against the defendant. But as there was a doubt he would give the defendant the-bene-fit of it. , The case was then dismissed.