CITY POLICE COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10239, 22 December 1894, Page 3

CITY POLICE COURT.

Thursday, December 20. (Before Mr E. H. Carew, S.M.)

DiiuXKESKESS.—GeorRe Cripps was fined ss, in default 24 hours' imprisonment; and Sarah Patterson, 10s, in default 4S hours' imprison-

A Charge op Vagrancy. — John Lowiy, a young man, was charged with being an idle and disorderly person.—On the application of Mr llanlon, who appeared for the accused, a remand until Saturday was granted. By-i«mv Cases.—David Anderson was charged with chiving a cab without a license.—Mr Milne appeared for the defendant, and stated that the owner of tie cab, James M'Donald, had given it to Anderson to go for a trip to Caversham. .'.uderson was an experienced driver in the employ of the Tramway Company, but en the trip a dispute arose with a passenger as to the fare. The result of this dispute was that the defendant was fined 20s for assault, so that the mau was pr.ictically being summoned twice for the same set of facts.—Mr Chapman, who appeared to prosecute, stated that Mr Milne put forward no extenuating circumstances whatever.—A fine of ss, and 2!Js (id costs, was inflicted. James il'Dunaltt was then charged with lending the call to Anderson, and pleaded guilty.—Mr Milne hiivi-os; spoken on his behalf, Mr Chapman called witnesses to prove that Anderson when he had charge of the cab was intoxicated, and was not tit to take charge of the horse and vehicle.—A fine of SOs, and 2Hs b'd costs, was inflicted. Harbour Board By-laws.—George Tilbury, an expressman, charged under section 2CO of the Harbour Board's by-laws with disobeying the wnttrfin»er's orders, pleaded guilty, but explained that he tnought at tbe time he had a right, when he had luggage actually at the tail of his. cart, to remain on tbe wharf till he finished loading.—Mr ■Sim appearing for the board, said that it was the first case brought under the by-law, and the chief object was to make it generally known that the wharfinger's orders must be obeyed. The board nskud for only a nominal penalty.— b raea ss, without costs. , Maintenance.—John Boyer was charged with foiling to provide for the maintenance of hw wife, HNther —His Worship made an order for the payment of 8s per week after evidence had been heard. John Paterson was charged with failing to provide for the maintenance of his wife, Mary Ann —Mr Sim appeared for the complainant, and Mr Fraser for defendant.—After evidence, defendant was ordered to pay 10s per week. Disobeying an Order.—Donald Hunter was charged on the information of Ihomas Hunter with disobeying an order for his support, lne rase hud been adjourned for a fortnight, awaiting Jni'°e Williams's decision in a similar case.—Mis Worship said that the effect of that decision was to assert that the provisions regarding the enfosceinent of orders under the repealed act of 1577 were k«pt alive by the Interpretation Act of 188b. Defendant was sentenced to one week's imprisonment, the warrant not to issue for seven days in ord«r to give him an opportunity of paying the mtSREACH OP THE LICENSING ACT.-John Wells, licensee of the Provincial Hotel, was charged with keeping the barmaid in the bar until after 11 p.m. on the 12th inst., and with keeping his house open for the sale of liquor after the prescribed hours on the same date.-Mr Fraser appeared for the defendant. who pleaded not guilty.—Both cases were heard together.— Inspector Pardy stated that on the night mentioned Sergeant Keating-wko was on duty in Princes street-saw the hotel lighted up. He and Constable AVebber went inside and saw three men in the room adjoining the bar, and the barmaid behind the bar in the act of removing entity glasses. Two of the men were not; lodeers, and on? of them had a glass of beer, while there were appearances of the others having taken drink When the police entered they met Mrs Wells in the passage, who, when she saw them, ran quickly on ahead, but they following on immediately saw what occurred. - Sergeant Keating gave evidence that at a quarter past 11 on the night mentioned he saw the front door of the hotel open, and the passage lighted up. He and Constable Webber entered and met Sirs Wells who went into the sitting room and thence to the bar. Witness followed, and saw in the sitting room adjoining the bar three men who looked like theatricals. The bar was lighted up, and the three men were at the counter. Une ot the men, named Thomas, had a glass of beer on the counter, while there was an empty glass and a two-shilling piece on it also. The names of the other men were Thomas Glaister (who said in the presence of the defendant that he resided in Momington) and Alfred Ingleson, who said he was a boarder. Defendant said to Ingle-on, Are you shouting?" and he replied "I will shout Defendant admitted that the girl behind the bar was the barmaid.-Constable Webber gave corroborative evidence -Mary Keating barmaid at the Provincial Hotel, deposed that she was in the bar at the time the police called, bhe was no relation to the defendant. -In answer to Mr Fraser witness said that the bar was closed to the general public at 10 o'clock She then sat in the sitting room reading, when Mr Pollard, who was a boarder and the head of the Juvenile. Opera Company, came in and asked her to supply him with three drinks for himself and two of the stage hands These drinks were supplied before 11 o'clock Just before the police came in one of the other men said he would shout again, and witness was mingtoserve this round when they were interrupted by tha sergeant.-This conchmed the case for the police.—Mr Fraser, for the defence, said that there was no evidence that anyone else except the theatre hands were supplied. Ihis hotel was frequented by stage hands, who were always employed at the theatre cleaning up the pli.ee till after 11. The only egress at chat hour was through Mr Wolls's hotel, and consequently tha house must be kept lit up. What took place on this occasion was that Mr Pollard, after the men ' were done, treated two of them to drinks, and lugleson shouted ill return. There was no desire to conceal any of the facts. The case was a simple one and there could be no suggestion that the law was being secretly evaded. The hotel was not kept open to supply the public The hotel was in the front street, and it was obvious that the whole thing was done openly. It was merely a case where a lodger was i entertaining two of his friends.—Mr Oarew : The I main charge is the keeping of the girl in the bar. I —Mr Ji'raser then referred to the definition of a I bar and, after speaking on the legal phase, of the I point, i-alled the defendant who said that the ! time the constables came into his hotel was thrae lor four minutes past U. It was correct that the 1 j»irl was in the bar uud that the three men were in the fitting room. When witness went in he said "Who ordered these drink??" and lugleson i replied " I did." Witness know it was iust aftw

The Engineers' Shooting Committee hava selected the following teams for the Christmas holidays :—To tire against the Timaru Navals, at Timaru: Sergeant-major Henry, Sergeant Barton, Corporals Beadle and Tonkin, Engineers Cable, Gardner, Gubbins, Hay, Stokes, Cantwell, Ford. To fire against Canterbury Engineers, at Dunedin: Captain Beal, Lieutenant Barclay, Sergeants Russell and Bryant, Bugler Ure, Engineers Chase, Henry, Miles, Campbell, Lacey, Dunne, Edmonds, Power, Wells, Spence, jThonison.