POLICE COURT NEWS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18077, 29 April 1922, Page 7

POLICE COURT NEWS.

ASSAULT CHARGE FAILS. OFFICE GIRL'S COMPLAINT.', A charge of havinij assaulted a girl aged 16 '.vas denied bv Patrick Joseph O'Bnen Mr. Lean*i, who came before Mr. J. W Poynton, S..M. in the Police Court yesj terday The girl stated that she had been employed in the office oi the Peopie i Publicity Proprietary, Mining Chambers, j ; of which accused was manager. Accused's , I partner sent, her on a message and she ! i met accused at the top of tie stairs. He i 1 asked where she was going, then put his ! j arm round her waist, pulled her along the ' : toward the office and tried to kiss : j her. He told her to come straight back i and he would try to get iiis partner out ■of the office. She complained to a fnend. j When accused was spoken to about it he ; 1 denied the allegation, and also said if he \ had he did not know he was doing it. I ! The sir] also said accused was not sober. , | The defence was a comnlete denial of j tho allegation. O'Bnen said the girl had I not attended to her work. He found her ; dallying in the passage, and receiving no satisfactory explanation, put his hand, ighllv on her shoulder, and told her her olace was in the office. Ho was sober. The allegations were quite unfounded. He i . 'iischarged the girl that day. The magistrate said he thought there was some doubt about the matter. The girl may have cot hysterical and imagined I ' things- The case was dismissed. THIEF SENT TO GAOL. I I Harry Nichol Sadler, a seaman, ap- I oeared" for sentence on four charges of theft, the value oi the property stolen being about £30. The articles had been , I taken from boarding houses at which accused had staved. A sentence oi six . months' hard labour was imposed. THEFT ON SHIP AT SUVA. ! The theft of a suit of clothes, valued at I £14 was admitted bv Alfred George i Scapens. a cook or. the Navna, The | offence was committed at Suva in Ftebi ruarv the suit belonging to a member of i ihe "crew of the Tofita. In a statement : produced bv Detective Gourley accused i said that when he arrived at Auckland ' this week the owner asked him if he had ; j the suit. He denied havnw it and re- , ! ported to the police that he had been | accused of having the suit. Finally he ■ admitted having taken it. Accused was ; i fined £5 and ordered to pay the value ot | the suit, £12 12& LICENSING PROSECUTIONS. A charge of having been unlawfully on licensed promises, the Prince Arthur Hotel, was denied by James Smith and Daniel Deiahunty .Mr. Singer). he ! evidence showed that when the police i visaed the hotel one evening they tound ' the two me... w.th glasses m their hands | I drinking liquor. Smith had booked a , j room at the hotel for the night, and h s , name was in me book. Uunse submitted that Smith, being a boarder, was : entitled to drink on the premises to in- j i r!te his fnend to the bote., and to incite him to have a drink, provided the j i boarder paid. The charge was dismissed. ■ ( ,he magistrate saying it was quite true ! that the law, as it stood, allowed a 'boarder at an hotel to treat ms ineiids. I He could treat them all night if he uked. , It was open to many abuses. Ihe loopI hole in the law had been pointed out years ago. but the law had not been | a'tered. . i James Heart! and D. Davis were e&cli i fined £1 for having been unlawful y on [licensed premises. Wpyard. *» Hotel, and £1 for having given a false address to the constable- The magistrate said he was. not satisfied with their explanation. _ . The licensee of the Shakespeare Hotel, Daniel Cooper (Mr. Prendergast). was •onvicted and ordered to pay costs for havme employed an urremstered har- ! maid "It was stated that when defendant I look over the hotel the woman was em- ;. ! oloved there and ho engaged her with 1 nther members of the staff. After inj quiries it was found she wns not regis- ■ tered. The barmaid was fined £2. I MISCELLANEOUS OFFENCES. ! For having failed to deliver up a ; -adet. uniform to the Defence Department 1 H G Lowe, aged 16, was line<i £1 and j i costs. It was stated that the uniform j i had been returned after the issue of the ! | summons, but the blouse was damaged J ! and could not be accepted. A number of persons were prosecuted . for breaches of the Arms Act. Several of the defendants were firms or dealers I who had sold or offered for sale fire- ; arms without a dealer's license. They ; iad failed to renew their licenses on ex- | oiratinn. Minor pena'ties were imposed. A fine of £1 and costs was imposed ! oil Martin S.vndprs for rommitting a nuisance in a railway carriage. ! Arthur Newdirk was fined £3 and costs for having erected ;i stable without havI mi: obtained a permit from the City , | Council. j TWO CAfJES REMANDED. John Dyer was remanded for a week on a charge of having committed an | I aggravated 'assault on a girl under 14. | Alfred John Mi'ls was remanded to ; Wellington on a charge of having stolen I a gold watch, chain, sovereign case. j mesial, a wallet and £9 in cash, of a total value of £50. j