LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVIII, Issue 8473, 26 January 1891, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

POLICE COURT.—Saturday. [Before Dr. Giles. E.M.I Drunkenness. —John Claude and John Evers wero fined 10s and costs each, or in default forty-eight hours' imprisonment. Industrial Schools Act.—Mr. Strathern, on behalf of oh© Charitable Aid Board, made an application to have two children, Robert Davis and Frederick Davis, committed to the Kohimarama Industrial School. Eliza Davis deposed that she was a widow, residing at Mount Eden, and went out sewing for a living. She was not able to earn sufficient means to support) her children. Dr. Giles made an order that the boys bo sent to Kohimarama Industrial School. Alleged Cruelty.—Thomas Brophy was charged with ill-t-eating a horse, by driving the same whilst suffering from sore shoulders. Mr. F. Earl appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. C. F. Buddie for the defence. Wm. Redgate deposed that he saw the horse in question in a tramcar, driven by accused, on Saturday, January 14. Constable O'Brien and James Burt gave evidence for the prosecution in this case. Edward Brophy deposed that he did not know the horse had a sore shoulder until he had taken the horse. James Bonner also gave evidence for the defence, stating that the collar was padded, so as not to touch the sore. After hearing some further evidence, His Worship remarked that he did not consider the case a serious one, and imposed a fine of 10s, and costs 15s. Cecil Gledstanes, also a tramdriver, was charged with having driven one horse which had a sore shoulder and one which had a sore side. Defendant urged that the sores had nearly healed up, and were protected. Dr. Giles, after hearing the evidence, considered that the charge was proved as far as the horse with the sore shoulder was concerned, and fined the defendant 10s and costs. He dismissed the charge concerning the horse with a sore side. Edward Comerford, for driving a horse with a sore shoulder, was fined 5s and costs. The case against James Bonner for a similar offence was dismissed.

KAWAKAWA R.M. COURT.

January 8, 1891. [Before H. W. Bishop, Esq., R.M.] County Election.—His Worship read the following petition : —We, the undersigned electors of the Bay of Islands County (Kawakawa Riding), hereby declare that we verily believe that at the election to the office of county councillors holden at Kawakawa on the 7th day of December, 1890, at which William Hamlin Ward and Allen Christy were declared to be duly elected to the said office, the election of the said William Hamlin Ward and Alien Christy is void on the following grounds : (1) That under sub-section 2 of section 50 of the Regulation of Local Elections Act, 1876, the polling booth was not opened within the hour required by the Act, the returning officer being absent until seven minutes to ten a.m., instead of nine a.m., as required by the Act. (2) That the names on the ballot papers were printed with only the initials of the Christian names of the respective names of the candidates, and not at full length, as required by the Act. (3) That at the said election a breach of subsection 2 of section 18 of the said Act was committed by the returning officer. (4) That at the said election a breach of section 24 of the said Act was committed by the returning officer. —Given under our hands this 22nd day of December, 1890: Henry Edward Vokes, Francis Mackenzie, John Keatley, John Flanagan, Adam Girven, D. J. Kirkpatrick. Witnessed before me this 22nd day of December, 1890 : T. P. Moody, J.P. Mr. Henderson appeared for the petitioners, and Mr. Reed for the County Council, who stated that the Council had no intention of setting up a defence. His Worship said it was no good going into the case, as he had no wish to add to the annoyance of the Council. All that could be said was that the late Kawakawa elections were a disgrace both to returning officer and the Council. He had no option in the matter, and must declare the election void. Solicitor's costs, £3 3s, and expense of advertising. Collector of Customs v. Robert Marshall. — The defendant), hotelkeeper of Towai, was charged with unlawfully and knowingly withdrawing the beer from a cask without defacing the duty stamp. The defendant explained to the Bench how it was the offence had been committed during his temporary absence from the house. He would leave himself entirely in the hands of the Bench. There was no criminal intent to evade the law. His Worship said it was quite clear she offence had been •committed, and the law was very stringent in all cases touching H.M. Customs. Defacing the stamp was not sufficient, the beer must be drawn through the bung-hole covered by the stamps. Fined £3 and costs.

Altering Ear-marks on Sheep.—Here Werehere was charged on the information of W. F. Hewitt with altering the earmarks of IS sheep at Waimate. Mr. J. R. Reed for the prosecution, and Mr. W. Goffe acted as interpreter. Defendant pleaded " Not guilty." Stealing eight fleeces The defendant was farther charged by the same informant with stealing eight fleeces (his property) at Waimate some time in December last, to which he again pleaded "Not guilty." It was agreed that the cases should be heard together. The evidence of a number of witnesses was taken, and the cases were then adjourned until next court day. Crowe v. Clarke. —The defendant was charged with using slanderous language, calculated to provoke a breach of the peace, and praying that the defendant be bound over to keep the peace. A number of witnesses were examined on both sides, when the Bench said it was clear that a good case for slander by civil process could be made out on behalf of Crowe, who had the sympathy of the Bench, and would leave the court without a stain upon his character, but the information was dismissed without costs. If plaintiff liked, he had his remedy in a higher court.[Own Correspondent.]