CITY POLICE COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10362, 17 May 1895, Page 3

CITY POLICE COURT.

■■'■ : ■ :■■• Y~r —'■■•» '■■/;■ , '■'■',';".:-,.' • Thursday, May 16. - : (Before Mr B. IL Garew.S.M.) ; _ Industrial Schools - Alice Hill was brought before the court for being a child: within the meaning of the act, having ao .means of subsisteiice, and:her parents being dead.—Sergeant OiSeill haying mentioned that the mother had died four or t^ve years ago, and the ff.ther, who ■was a, newsagent and newspaper hawker, kiiovra as .Yankee Sams last we«k in the hospital, the •child was committed to the-Industrial School, to be brought up in the Church of England form of religion. ■ ' : ..... .'..'' Grose v. TooHBY.-John Toomey was charred with assaulting Thomas Grose.—Mr Si in, iu-s-ructed by Mr Thornton, asked for an'adjournmeut; for a fortnight, as Mr Toomey had gone to Wellington on business and would not bo back for some time.—Mr Solomon, who appeared for complainant, could not consent to the adjournment. I he assault was an unprovoked one as far n.s Mr Grose was concerned.-Mr Sim said there was no suggestion that Mr Tourney wauld not return.— , k°'omon did not doubt ,that. It was known that Mr foomey was in the liabit of going about the place knocking everybody abous. It' was JvQowu to the court-that he was bound over .to keep the peace. He (Mr Solomon) did not want To inconvenience Ms friend, and if lie agreed to the p»ymant of costs the adjournment vyould be consented to.—The case was adjourned for a fortniKlit, professional costs dps Gd) and half witnesses' expenses <15i) being allowed. liiefi.—William Watt, who gave his age as 18, pleaded guilty to bavins, about February 27, sr^len. a .quantity of clothing, of the value of d) 3, the property .of Franqis Hawke. — Chief JJstactive 0 Connor stated that the clothes were stolen from a clothes line —Accused was further charged with stealing goods to the value of 10*, t&e property of John Hosking Carter, and ploaded guilty to this also.—Detective O'Connor said that in this case the goods were stolen from Mr Carter's shop door. Accused was followed, but "planted" the goods, and substquently, gave them up to Mr Carter.—Accused pleaded not guilty to a third <* rS?° f stealing a pair of trousers, of the valua °+ I s ?lv the Property of ;Mr Carter.-The Detective stated that Mr Carter missed these trousers at the time the other things were stolen, and accused was found wearing them spine time afterwards. He said he bought them frpm some young fellow whom' he. did not know for 3*.—(evidence was given by John Hosking Carter and Walter Joseph •i:P\ t-~Acou'se(3 made a statement in keening, with thtt detsctive's remarks.—His Worship said it had not actually been proved that he stole the trousers. The evidence showed that the trousers were stolen some months ago, and were a good while afterwards found in the posses-sion of accused. His Worship did not thiuk ihis was sufficient reason on which to convict With regard to the other cases acrused would be convicted and sentenced to a month's imprisonment on each *he sentences to be cumulative. ■ c Infant Life Promotion Act.—Rebecca Haljo:d was charged, on remand, with being the keeper of a child under the age of two years, and with tailing to register hqr house under the ■Infant Life Protection Ant.—SsrKeaa'j O'Neill Baid this case had been adjourned some while back to give tims to communicate with the father in Auckland. , Defendant had received a latter from the father, who had made arrangements for the child to be forwarded to him. With a view to seeing this arrangement carried out, the J>erge;inD a.vke'l for an adjournment.—Adjourned for a fortnight. ': Light Wkights. — William Higginson was cliarged with having a lib weight in his pos«ession which was found to be light.—A. plea of § «>% waa recorded.—lnspector Hanson stated that defendant carried on business in Dun*din He was found carting meat about the towni having a lib weight which was nearly a quarter of an ounce light. All the other weights were equaliylight in proportion.—His Worship intimated that the weights would be forfeited, and inflicted a fine of 20s and costs. The Shop and Shop Assistants Act.—John Itlem'ng was charged with failingto close his shop ou May 1, in accordance with theacf,.—Mt Salomon for d«tendant, pleaded guilty.—Defendant was further clurgei, on two informations, with employing Michael Fentou and James Cable on the Wednesday afternoon, in contra vnntionof the act;—Mr .Solomon pleaded guilty in both inf.tances.—Mr Huggitt, who appeared for the inspector of factories, proceeded to refer to the sections under which the informations were laid and iiaid that no aotion would have been taken again3t Mr Fleming had he not persisted in keeping open afi.er being warned. He had kept hia shop open on three or four occasions for half an hour or an hour after the hour for closing. Complaints were made and action was taken. The inspector did not ask for anything but a small penalty. It might seem a trifling matter to keap open for half an hour ovor time, but the law required that the shop must bo closed at ana o'clock. If others closed it was not fair that Mr Fleming should keep open, and it was on the ground of complaints being made that the present proceedings had been taken.—Mr Solomon said it was unfortunately a fact that defendant had kept his premise.? open half an hour longer than was prescribed. He(Mr Solomon) need hardly point out the hardship that arose from this drastic alteration in the law. Mr Fleming was supplying people with food for animals, and had «aid to the inspector that he was on the horna of a dilemma, for if he"sJid not supply the food he might be taken up on that 3core :4so. If, took a little time to get people into such acornpletn alteration in tho law as existed in this' direction.—A fine of 6s, and costs, was inflicted in each case. .-..■. Factories Act!— John Philip Armstrong was charged that, being iti the occupation of certain premises on the 13th ihbt., at Runodin, he failed to register them under the Factories Act.—A second charge of not keeping his premises in conformity with the provisions of the act was also preferred.—Mr \V. MacGregor appeared for the inspector of factories, instructed by Mr Frasor, and Mr 0. Mouat for defendant, and pleaded aot guilty.—Mr MacGregor Si.id there was only 0119 serious question to connider—ar;d tbai was what both parties want<;d to be nettled—whether or not a dentist's establishment, smchai Mr Armstrong's, was a factory within the meaning of the act. Mr Armstrong said it was not, and the inspector said it waa. There was no desire to press for a he?.vy penalty—what they wanted was for his Worship to decide whether it wai a factory or not. Inspector Maxwell had called upon defendant several times and impressed upon him the neceesity of registering his placs of business as a factory, but Mr Armstrong declined to do so. He had written his grounds for not registering as follow: — I beg to submit that I do not come under the Factories Act because, first, I do not make articlss for^ trade or sale any more than a solicitor drawing a deed, as all operations, surgical or otherwise, are only 01 service to the person operated on. Secondly, dentistry is not a handicraft because (1) what is tanned the mechanical part is really not making teeth (th^-y are obtained from the manufacturer), but rendftiing them suitable for such person; (2) the surgical part cornea under the head of surgery; (:!) a large part of one's practice is really medically treating pathological conditions of the mouth." The hands in the place of busi- ' ness, counsel continued, consisted of Mr Arm.

etrong, Mr Prank Armstrong, George Wright, and two young persons, male apprentices.— Inspector Maxwell having given evidence, Mr Mouat snid the difficulty he saw was that ,there '. was no evidenco as to what kind of business it ; waß.—Mr MacGregor: There is Mr Armstrong's ! letter.—Mr Monat : That denies it—Mr Mac- | Gregor : Oh, no; it does" not. —John I'hilip. Armstrong then entered thu box and detailed the particulars of the business he carried.on. —Mr Meust said the whole point in the case waa whether tha business of a dentist was a factory under the act. j He would endeavour to show that it was not, and j would try1 to show that the only cases -where the | act eamu into force was where the business was for making articles for trade or sale ; and that it \ did not apply to a profession as apart from a trade. Counsel on both sides having been heard in argument, his Worship intimated that he Would give a decision next Thursday. Assault. — George Rackley was charged, on remand, with assaulting a.n'i beating Georgo Clark.—Mr Solomon appeared fov the informant, and stated that the assault wits an impudent one. Mr Clark had a place of business in Manor street, and defendant cums into the yard and prepared to ! commit a nuisance, in view of the occupants of ] the shop. Informant remonstrated with him, and j pointed out that there was a place of convenience ; across the street. Defendant thereupon struck ! informant across the arm and head with a walking stick, which broke in the operation. Complainant, bping a more powerful man. laid hold of defendant and urged him to leave the premises. He let him go, and entered' his shop, and defendant threw a large-sized piece of road i metal, which struck the door on a level with com- | plainant's head, and made towards the door. Mr j Clark closed the door, and defendant turned the key in the look, taking the key away with him, aad leaving Mr Clark inside. Mr Clark, with the aid of a screwdriver, released himself, and followed defendant, and coming up with him took from him the remains of the stick used in the assault, but not seeing a policeman about let him go. He afterwards reported the matter to the police and g«ve a description of the man.— ] Counsel cilled complainant, — Steuhouse, and, Constable Oooney.— Defendant stated that he was suffering from a complaint which forced him to i take reEuge in Mr-Clark's yard, but denied that I be had been so • violent as was alleged.—His Worship convicted defendant and fined him SOa and costs 28s. —Defendant applied for 14 days to ! pay, and Mr Solomon not objecting, it was granted.—Tha charge of stealing the key was withdrawn. -...'■