LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXIII, Issue 7722, 21 August 1886, Page 6

LAW AND POLICE.

POLICE COURT.— [Before Mr. H. G. Seth Smith, R.M.J Drunkenness.Two men were punished for this offence in the customary fine of 5a and costs. Stealing Potatoes. — George Thomas Howell (carter) was charged with the larceny of a sack of potatoes, valued at 10s, the property of W. S. Whitley, on August 19. Mr. Th'eo. Cooper ' appeared for the accused, and pleaded guilty, stating that there were extenuating circumstances under which the offence had been committed. The accused had been a carter in the city for thirty years. He was under the influence of liquor at the time. The sack of potatoes had been found on his drayhe-having taken them from the wharf. His Worship took into consideration the previous good character of the accused, and cautioned him not to appear again, and dismissed the case. A Carpenter's Kit.—Laurence O'Brien (alias Luke O'Bried) was charged with stealing a number of carpenter's -tools, and two kits, valued at £9 4s, tho property of William Hutchinson, on August 18. Sergeant Pratt applied for a remand till Tuesday, an all the tools had not • been recovered yet. The accused had been arrested under suspicious circumstances in regard to the fire discovered in Elliottstreet, and it was the intention of the police to charge him with causing the fire. Remanded till Tuesday next, August 24. Passing a Valueless Cheque.—Ernest Moore, surrendered to his bail upon the charge of uttering a valueless cheque on July 27. Mr. J. O'Meagher appeared for the accused, and applied for a further remand of a week, and understood that the prosecution had no objection to the application. Remanded for seven days, till Friday, August 27. The accused's bail was further enlarged. Breach of the Medical Practitioners' Act.—Samuel Hood was again charged with a breach of the Medical Practitioners Act, Mr. Theo. Cooper appeared for the prosecution, and asked for a further adjournment, as the defendant, who had promised to leave by the first steamer for Sydney, had been unable to get away, there being no vessel going. Adjourned accordingly for a week, > to Friday, August 27. Sunday Liquor Trading.—George Leech, licensee of the Alexandra Hotel, Parnell, was charged with a breaoh of the Licensing Act by selling liquor (beer) to one Joseph Baker, he not being a bona fide traveller, on Sunday, August 15, There was also a second information for supplying James Moody. Mr. T. Cotter appeared for the defendant, and pleaded not guilty in both informations, on which it was arranged to take the evidence of both together. Sergeant Pratt conducted the prosecution, and from his statement of the facts it seemed that both of the men had been found drinking in the hotel by the constable Joseph Baker, labourer, Parnell, was in the Alexandra Hotel about half past) six p.m. on Sunday . last. He was inside when the constable came in, and was in the sittingroom. He had a pint of beer which Mr. Leech gave him. He had only one pint, and did not pay for it, nor did anybody else that he knew. The defendant had called him in to have a drink. Witness attended to the stable for Mr. Hodgson, and had cleaned up the yard as it was untidy from the litter of straw about. He did not return home drunk that day, but went home to lie down and pass the day as best he could. The witness was cross-examined by Mr. Cotter. James Moody, cabinetmaker, Manukau Road, Parnell, was in the hotel on Sunday evening last. He was supplied with a pint of beer by the defendant, and also saw Baker served with beer,. Witness did not pay for it as he asked the defendant for a drop of beer, and he gave it to him. He did not sleep at the hotsl that night for the purpose of the present case. He was not in" the habit of stopping at the hotel that he could remember, but he ' stopped there all Sunday last. He did not know that the beer had to be paid for, but he could state that the defendant refused to supply him with driak at illegal hours.—ln cross-examination the witness stated that he was a widower, bad been in the habit lately of having his meals at the hotel on Sunday.—Harriett Baker, daughter of the first witness, deposed that her father left home about nine o'clock and she watched him enter the hotel. When lie came out again, about half-past one o'clock, be was under the influence of drink, and just able to walk home. He lay down till about six o'clock, and then returned to the hotel.— Constable Hobson deposed that a complaint was made to him by Mrs. Baker, about her hubband, He proceeded to the Alexandra hotel, about half-past six p.m., and found Baker and Moody in the sittingroom each drinking beer. He was certain that they were drinking it. Baker said, "Now, Hobson, don't say anything about this." [At this stage of the evidence Mr. Cotter objected to the statement unless the defendant was present.] Witness could not remember if Leech was there as his back was turned to the bar, and at the close of the conversation he found that the defendant lied gone into the bar. Baker was then uuder the influence of drink. This was the case for the prosecution. Mr. Cotter submitted that no sale had been shown, and therefore the case in supplying Baker should fail, while that of Moody, he contended, had Dot been proved, as the evidence went to show that he had his meals in his house. His Worship, in giving his decision, said the information in regard to supplying Moody had failed, aud should be dismissed, while that in reference to Baker amounted to very grave suspicion, but not sufficient to support ! a conviction. The defendant's license, which I had been put in, was therefore returned.