LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVIII, Issue 8500, 26 February 1891, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

i .• POLICE COURT.Wednesday Before Sir W. M dW. Drunkenness.One firsb offender was fined 5s and costs, or, in > default, 24 hours' hard labour. . ....... • Disobedience. — Ferdinand Thompson, seaman on board , the Persian Empire, was charged with having refused to obey the lawful commands of the chief officer, Arthur Inwood. The complainant deposed that on the 24th February, defendant refused to stack some wood when ordered to do so, and then wenb ashore without leave. Witness did not think defendant was quite sober. Thompson had hitherto borne a good character.. Defendenb . was ordered to pay the costs of the prosecution, to be imprisoned for. 24 hours' and. theft to return to the ship. '■ : ' House of , Illfame.—, Wilson . alias Curtis, was charged with keeping a house of ill-fame in: Rokeby-street. Inspector Broham said that both Mr. Earl and Mr. Cotter were engaged in this case, and asked that as there were some legal points to be considered, the case might be adjourned in order bo be dealt with by the Residenb Magistrate. The case was accordingly adjourned for three weeks. Slaughtering Without LicenseAugustus Loftus pleaded guilty to slaughtering sheep at North cote, on the 18th February, without having a license 'to do so. Mr. Brassey appeared for. the defendant. A fine of £1 and costs was inflicted. Selling Liquor After Hours,—Wm, Lynch was charged with having sold beer after the hours permitted by tho Licensing Act. Mr. Cotter appeared for the defendant, and pleaded not guilty. Constable Mathieson deposed that shortly after midnight on the nth instant he saw a man and woman go into the Clarendon Hotel. The man, whose name was Howard, came out after a few minutes. Witness found a bottle containing beer upon him. He took Howard back to the hotel, and he pointed out Mr. Lynch as the man .who served him. I Mr. Lynch, however, absolutely denied that Howard had been, m the house, and the night porter corroborated this statement. Witness had seen the man Howard at his house on two occasions' since the 11th. Constable McCoy deposed to seeing Howard going into the Clarendon Hotel, and waited for him to come out. He found a bottle of; beer on him. Witness corroborated the evidence of the former witness. Howard was a fishmonger, and he could not say., he . was a loafer. The hotel was lit up. Constable Stephenson also gave evidence. John Howard, an oyster dealer, living in Albert-street, deposed that on . the morning in question' he was admitted to the Clarendon Hotel by the night porter and served with beer by defendant. The constables took the beer J from him and marched him back to the hotel, .where • witness pointed out Mr. Lynch as the man who had served him. Mr. Lynch, however, denied having done so. Catherine Howard, wife of previous witness, deposed that she went with her husband to the Clarendon, but did not see him come out, having gone away first. Her husband took a bottle with him. [ She generally went to the Shamrock, as it | was nearest, and she had never been to the I Clarendon before. This was the case for the prosecution. Mr. Cotter contended that nothing had been produced to show that the Auckland East district had been duly constituted under the Licensing Act. He would like a note taken of this point. Inspector Broham urged that it rested with Mr. Cotter to show that the district had not been so constituted. Sir W. Fox spoke of an adjournment to, allow the necessary documents to be pub in to show that the district was duly constituted in accordance with the requirements of the Act. Mr. Cotter, however, said that after the case for the prosecution had been closed no further evidence could be admitted. If the Bench allowed an adjournment to enable the prosecution to pub in some further evidence for their case, he had nothing more to say if that was what they considered their duty. The Bench decided that the case must be dismissed, on the grounds that it had nob been properly proceeded with, but the prosecution would have the opportunity of commencing proceedings over again. . ! < OPUNAKE R.M. COURT. [Before Major Tuke, R.M.J Threatening and Abusive Language. Pikiti, of Waiau, was charged that he did use thretening and abusive language in a public place at Opunake. Defendant said he did not remember anything of it, beiiig drunk. Mr. Stitt gave evidence. Constable Twomey prosecuted. Defendant had been convicted two years ago and fined. Fined 20s and 9s costs. Thomas Henry Mann v. Joseph Pennington.—Claim £6 13s 4d. Defendant pleaded not indebted. Mann, sworn, said he leased the premises as stated. Lease produced. Pennington, sworn, said, the lease produced was the one signed by him. The house was very wet. He had to nut coals of fire in a pan in the bed-room. It was not habitable for a human being. His family had caught the fever there, and were very ill. Mann and Moore agreed to release him if he would pay two months' rent. He offered them one, and offered to put in a tenant, which they j refused. They defied him to put one in [ without Mr. Moore's approval. He did not put in any, the house being unfit for human habitation. He tried to effect a compromise as a tenant. He left the premises and went to Waitara. He could not live there. Mr. Mann subsequently locked the gate. A few days after he left he heard that Mann was constantly working on the place, improving it, draining, etc. In answer to Mann, the defendant said his wife and family were ill. They did make a* complaint to plaintiff's mother, but could not state the date. It was somewhere about the _ 12th of August. He told the plaintiff that Mrs. Peacock would temporarily occupy, but plaintiff refused to allow her.-. Mann said no complaints had. ever been made. The defendant had seen the p'ace before leasing it. Pennington said he would have taken the place for a longer term if the' house was shifted up on higher ground. By the Court: The place was not fit to live in, and. this was a piece of blackmailing. The Court conld not see how this affected the case, as there was a written stamped lease, and Mr. Pennington had seen the place before signing it. The Resident Magistrate said, although he knew the place was wet, he must give judgment for plaintiff, with costs 255. Defendant said he would appeal, and he would seek the protection of the Court. He there and then declared himself insolvent, and said he could not pay. A few minor cases were disposed of, and the Court adjourned.[Own Correspondent].