LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 10338, 13 January 1897, Page 6

LAW AND POLICE.

POLICE COURT.—Tuesday. [Before Mr. H. W. Northcroft, S.M.) Drunkenness.— offenders were cautioned, and Peter Petersen was ordered to pay a fine of 20s, with the option of seven days. Alleged Pocket-picking.—John Stewart, who was committed for trial the previous day on a charge of stealing; from the person, was charged that on December 24 th, at Auckland, he aid steal from the person of one Agnes McEnteer a purse containing £2 and two small keys. Mr. Cooper appeared for the accused, and made an application to have the case dealt with summarily. His Worship said he did not think he could deal with it as Mr. Cooper wished, and decided, to take the case as indictable till the evidence should be given. Then he would consider the matter again. Agnes McEnteer, wife of Thomas McEnteer, Archhill, stated she was going on board the p.s. Wakatere on the date mentioned in the charge. Just as she stepped on the gangway she felt a hand at her pocket, and, turning round', she saw accused with her purse in his hand. She demanded it back, and, after asking twice, accused handed it over, asking her not to say anything about it. Afterwards he stated he had picked it up off the wharf. To Mr. Cooper: The purse did not fall out of witness's pocket. Thomas McEnteer supported his wife's evidence. Constable Hodgson stated that accused was identified at the Mount Eden Gaol by Mrs. McEnteer as the person who stole her purse. When Mr. McEnteer acbused Stewart of the offence, the latter said, " There must be some mistake; 1 was at the Thames at the time." Mr. Cooper again raised the question of treating the matter summarily. His Worship said in the face of the other case, and in the interests of the public, it would be better to commit him. The reason many small cases were dealt with summarily was to save expense to the country, but in the present instance His Worship would not be incurring expense to the country, as the witnesses were almost the same as in the case heard against accused on Monday. Where there were two cases of a similar nature Mr, Northcroft thought they should go before a jury. If one were serious and one were trivial, it might be different. Mr. Cooper said he would reserve his defence. Aceused was committed for trial, bail being granted in two sureties of £59, awl accused himself in one of £100. Mistaken Identity.—A little ' boy, by name Edward Hoggard, pleaded not guilty to having on October 17th, at Arch Hill, stolen three ducks, valued at ss, the property of Floia McDonald. Sergeant Kelly appeared for the police and accused was defended by Mr. Brookfield, who appeared on behalf of the Society for the Protection of Women and Children. The evidence went to show that Mrs. McDonald missed three ducks on October 17th, and subsequently found them at?, fish dealer's, where they had been sold by two boys. The dealer thought young Hoggard was one of the hoys but could not swear to his identity. Two lads said two other boys admitted having stolen the ducks, but on being put in the witnessbox the latter two denied; the charge. His Worship said he was satisfied Hoggard did not commit the theft and discharged him,