LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9086, 21 June 1888, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

POLICE COURT.—Wednesday. [Before H. C. S. Baddeley, Esq., R.M.] Drunkenness. — Theresa Maud Moss was fined 5s and costs for this offence, with an alternative of 24 hours' imprisonment. Larceny.. Evans was charged with stealing an axe, the property of Mat hew Arbuckle at Surrey Hills, valued at ss, on June 16th, and also with stealing a spade, the value of ss, the property of Isabella Wilkie, at Ponsonby, on the same date. The prisoner pbaded guilty to both charges. The Resident Magistrate sentenced the prisoner to three months' imprisonment for each offence, the sentences to run consecutively. Stray Cows. — Mary Adamson was charged with allowing three cows to stray in Symonds-street on the 12th inst. The defendant did not appear. Constable Dews proved the case, saying he found three cows about seven a.m., that had just come out of the Cemetery. He followed them home. The defendant had not an inch of ground to keep her cows on, and she was in the habit of turning the cows adrift, to get their living the best way they could. She had been summoned twice before for the same offence, and there were many complaints about them. The Resident Magistrate fined the defendant 10s for each cow, and costs.

Illegitimacy. —Albert Cutler wascharged with being the father of an illegitimate child, of which Annie Pike is the mother. Mr. Buckland appeared for the accused, and pleaded not guilty. Mr. Theo. Cooper appeared for the complainant, and Mr. Humphreys watched the case for a witness. The Court was cleared during the hearing of the case. The complainant, Annie Pike, stated she was nineteen years of age. Her mother was dead. She first met the defendant on Christmas Day, 18SG, in Oralcei Road, when he spoke to her. At that time she was living with her uncle, at Remuera. She did not reply to the defendant. She next met the defendant on January 4,1887, when she was introduced to him. On this occasion she went for a walk with him. Nothing improper occurred on ihis occasion, and she also met him or several occasions between January ant

ipril. She also met him on Easter Manlay, April 11, which was her birthday, on Drakei Beach, by chance. They went for a (valk along the beach, when defendant made mproper proposals, but she refused. On ;he following Sunday evening, returning rom church at Remuera, they went along i lane, and defendant made the same proposals, and witness consented, and an improper act took place. The defendant, ifter the act, said he should clear out if my consequences followed. Familiarities jccurred on several occasions after this, and n June she consulted Dr. La wry, who told ler she was pregnant. She informed the lefendant, who would not believe it at first, md then told her when the child was jorn to smash its brains out. She was lonfined in the Refuge, on January 14th of ihis year. Between her becoming pregnant md the child's birth she saw defendant, but lie did not speak to her. She wrote to him to come to &ee her, but 119 did not do 30. About three weeks ago witness saw defendant at the 'bus stand, near the Greyhound, and asked him to support the clilid. He refused, saying, " I will not. Where is your cousin 1" and told her to summon him. She said she would. When in service she earned 7s per week. She was not in service now, but staying with her aunt at Remuera. She had no means to support the child. Mr. Buckland crdss-eStimined the witness, putting a number of searching questions reflecting on the complainant's chastity, and she admitted that she had acted improperly with a man named Otto two years ago. A man named Donald Thomas McDonald also testified. Mr. Cooper next placed the defendant in the box, who deposed he first saw complainant on the day after Christmas Day. He was acquainted with her, and had been improperly intimate with her about a week after Christmas, and " went " with her only four or five weeks in 1887. He met her at the Remuera Church. Crossexamined : Defendant denied that he had been intimate with her after the four or five weeks stated, because she used to speak to all the boys in Remuera.. They were always " knocking about " with her, and defendant got suspicious, and left her off. This was the case for the complainant. Mr. Buck-

land, for the defence, contended there must be confirmatory evidence, and mere courtship or admission of acts of familiarity by the father was not such. He then called Peter Gillan, who deposed to her cousin, Eli Williams, giving her a bad name. In cross-examination by Mr. Cooper, the witness stated that Cutler, the defendant, had told witness that he, Cutler, had been intimate with the complainant. Defendant also told witness complainant was expecting to be a mother, and defendant then said he would throw her up, and not keep her company any more. By the Court: Defendant led witness to believe that he (defendant) had been with the complainant very recently. The conversation was about April, but he would not be certain. Eli Williams deposed that the complainant was his cousin. When she first came down from the Waikato he was friendly with his cousin, but he never had any improprieties with her. He quarrelled with her, and might for this reason have given her a bad character. Witness did not, of his own knowledge, know anything wrong of her. There were not many young men come to see her, nor did she go after young men. This was the case. The Resident Magistrate adjudged the defendant to be the father of the child, and ordered him to pay 5s per week for the child's support, and full [Before Dr. Giles, R.M.J The Thistle Hotel Burglary.—William Anderson Crombie was charged with having broken out of the Thistle Hotel on June 14th, and stolen therefrom a bottle of whisky valued at ss, and a bottle of rum valued at ss, the property of Mrs. Mary Coyle, licensee. Mr. Napier appeared for the prisoner, and pleaded not guilty, and Sergeant- Pratt conducted the prosecution on behalf of the police. The evidence was only taken for the prosecution. Mrs.

Mary Coyle, the licensee, and John Brown, the barman, and Constable Kelso being the witnesses examined. We have already published the outline of the case. The evidence adduced yesterday was to the effect that on the evening of the 13th, just before closing time, theprisoner entered thehotel, and called for and was served with a "long beer," which he drank as he stood at the bar. While drinking it the closing hour arrived, and the barman, Brown, went round and closed the doors, leaving only a side door unfastened to let anyone out of the hotel after the principal entrances had been closed. When he had done this Mrs. Coyle told him he could go to bed, and he did so, leaving prisoner still at the bar with the remaining portion of his beer. Mrs. Coyle emptied the contents of the till in the bar, and placed them in a safe, which she locked. When she had finished locking the safe he was gone. Thinking he had left by the side door, Mrs. Coyle went round, tried the doors, and fastened the side door, which had been left open. As she went her rounds she noticed the cellar door key was not in the lock, but thinking the barman had it in hie custody she paid no more attention to this fact, and shortly afterwards also went to bed. About three o'clock. two constables entered the hotel, with the prisoner in custody, and roused the barman, who in turn awoke Mrs. Coyle, who dressed and came down. She then recognised the prisoner as the man whom she had seen at the bar, and on going through the bar found that a bottle of whisky and a bottle of rum, kept on a sideboard, were missing. While the prisoner was in the house he dropped the cellar door key, which was picked up by the police, and identified by Mrs. Coyle. Constable Kelso stated that on the morning of the 14th instant, about 3.15 o'clock, he was on duty in Queen-street, near the Thistle, when he saw the prisoner emerge from the door, go into Queen-street, and walk rapidly up the street. He followed the man, who turned up Wellesley-street East, into Lome-street, and overhauled him in Victoria-street. When nearly up to him, the man threw a parcel away, which broke like a bottle. The man denied doing this, but the constable took him back to the place. Constable Addison at this time came up, and they took him back to the Thistle Hotel, and called the inmates, who identified the man as having been in the hotel the evening before. Constable Kelso gave confirmatory evidence as to the dropping of the key. Afterwards the man was taken to the lock-up. On their way they found the broken rum bottle, and a bottle containing whisky, which was also identified by Mrs. Coyle. This concluded the case for the prosecution. Mr, Napier cross-examined exhaustively, and asked for

an adjournment, which was granted to Saturday, when the defence will be pre* sented.