LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XVIII, Issue 6253, 1 December 1881, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

POLICE COURT.—Wednesday. [Before J. Z. Macdonald, Ejij., R.H.J pRUNKEKsEsa.—Four persons were punished for ordinary offences of drunkenness. A Wfddi.no Spree.—Mary Lenham and Isabella Canuichael were brought up, charged with having bten drunk and disorderly. It appeared the two ladies had been married on the previous day, and io celebrating the weddiug they overstepped the bonnds of temperance, aud quarrelled, not only between themselves, but with their landlord. They were each fined 10s and costs, or in dofault 4S hours" imprisonment. Vaoks scy.—Loui rfk.v.i was charged under the Vagrant Act witu having no lawful visible means of support. ' The defendant, a strapping powerful young foreigner for whom Mr. Kummer interpreted, s:;!d he had only come in from work iu the bush. SerJ ge.int Gamble said the fellow had I.een for the last seven months loafing about the wharf, and at. late hours stopping people aad asking them for money i>o pay for a bed. He would not work, aud he had no doubt he was one of those whom people heard on their verandahs, ami who caused a great deal of the excitement which recently existed. Sergeant Martin deposed to having repeatedly seen accused loafing about the wharf and public houses. He never did any work. Whin he begged a shilling to pay for a bed hie straight course was for the nearest public house bar. Witness had frequent complaints, and frequently warned him that if he did not find woik he would bo arrested for vagrancy. Witness had never known him to work, aud he had no lawful visible means", of support. Mr. Orinistein also gave evidence. He was employed by Mr. Nathan. The prisoner frequently asked him foi money, which he spent on drink and cigars. He knew him in Newton to drink five beers and buy six cigars at oue time. The defendant said he wished to go to Australia, aud would endeavour to work hie passage. He was sentenced to a montii'e imprisonment with hard labour. Larceny.—Frank Fletcher, a little boy about 10 years of age, pleaded guilty to stealing £1, the property of his father, James Fletcher. Air. Fletcher said he oould get no good of the lad. He could not "et him to go to school, although he had beaten him till he was tired. He was committed to the Naval Training School for a perioil of two years and ten months.—John Taylor was charged with stealing a meersduum nine match-box, .Sec, value £1, the property of Samuel Griffin. Mr. Laishlev, lor the defendant, pleaded guilty, but said the defendant was so drunk he did not know what he was doing, and that this was the fact would be admitted by the police. The defendant was mate of the Lapwing, and earned his livelihood in au honourable way, and lie had plenty of money on him at the time. So satisfied were the police tlnit there was no guilty mind, that they reduced the charge to £1, in order that he might to the Court under the S2nd section of cho Justice of the Peace Act. to dismiss 11k ca.=e. Sergeant Gamble said tht -o wore the facts. Accused was tla-ji disolusr-cd. Stealin-.; ikiim Tiiy Pkk., >.—Thomas Petty was charged with ;,!.m!,: 1; j f, om the person of John I'uwer thu sum o! °Ci 10s, ou board the steamer Kott.-m.-ihaii :, on the voyage from the Thames to Aui-Uu::d on the 29th instant. He pleadc-d not gr.iUy. Sergeant Gamble stated tho ca.-,u, .».* published in yesterday's issue. The prosecutor, W. Jamicson, and Thomas f;r.iha:i! • ive evil deuce. The Bench held that tiic Tj.-.so was clearly proved, and sentenced defendant to three months' imprisonment .vi-.h hard labour. >"ecu2CTEi> Ciiu.DRKN-.—John Walker (7 years) and Edward Walker (4 years) were brought up as neglected children"within the meaning of the Act. The father ar.iilied to have them sent to the Industrial iSi/hool to which they were sent for live yc;:rs each.' Assault.—Joseph Dunn, on wan-aut was charged with assaulting W. U. Moenty, at Paumure, by seizing him by the shoulder and threatening him. A line of 10s and costs was imposed. Obscene Lanotjagk—John Miller was charged with having used obscene lan»ua"e in Adelaide-street. Mr. Laishl.y, for the defendant, pleaded not guilty. The police did not prosecute. After the evidence had leen heard, the case was dismissed with costs (£4), but His Worship .isle e<l Mr. Laishley what was the good of making an order for costs ag:."aat a married woman"