LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVII, Issue 8327, 6 August 1890, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

POLICE COURT.— Tuesday. [Before Dr. Giles, B.M.]

Drunkenness.—Ono man, a first offender, was fined 5s and costs, or in default 24 hours' hard labour. Mary McManus, an old offender, was fined '20s and costs, or 48 hours, and Annie Robertson, an habitual drunkard, was sentenced to three months' hard labour.

Stealing Boots.Elizabeth Bates was charged with stealing a pair of boots, valued at 5s lid, the property of W. H. Dam pier. Mr. Baume appeared for the defendant, and pleaded nob guilty. Charles Good, shopman at Dampier's, deposed that on the 31 st July last he went outside the shop door, and having looked about he missed a pair of boots. The boots were hanging outside. He saw the accused in front of the shop, about two yards off. She looked somewhat confused when he wont out. Witness then returned into the shop, and asked whether the boots had been sold. Finding that they had not, he went after the woman, who turned into Chapel-street. When witness gob near her, she turned round and took the boots from under her shawl, and said she was just going to bring them back. Witness then identified the

boots. Thomas Miller deposed that, on the 31st July, the former witness asked him whether he had sold the boots in question. He replied that he had not. On asking the accused why she stole the boobs, she said she did not do so, but that as she passed the boots they became caught by a pin in her shawl. He identified the boots produced in Court as the ones he had missed. Constable Lamb grave evidence as to the arrest of the defendant. Ho said she denied having stolen the boots, but stated that they were carried away by a pin in her shawl, and that she was about to take them back when the witness Good overtook her. Elizabeth Bates, the defendant, deposed that she had no intention of taking the boots, and did not know she had them until she was some distance from the shop. They had been caught by a pin in her shawl. She intended to return the boots. Several witnesses were then called to testify to the previous good character of the accused. Mr. Baume then addressed the Court for the defence. Dr. Giles said he was sorry to say that the defence was entirely without effect on his mind. The story was altogether too improbable, and might be used in almost every case of this nature. Notwithstanding the evidence as to previous good character, ho must consider the charge proved. Ho would, however, apply the First Offenders Probation Act in this case, and in order to do so he would adjourn the case until Saturday, pending the report of the probation officer. FaiiilNG to Provide.—William Cluno and Alfred Clune were each ordered to pay os per week for the support of their mother.