CITY POLICE COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 11253, 25 October 1898, Page 8

CITY POLICE COURT.

. Monday, October 24. (Before Messrs S. G. Smith and R. Slater, J.P's.) Drunkenness.—James White was convicted and discharged, and Ellen M'Gee was sentenced to three months' imprisonment for being an habitual drunkard. Petty Theft.—William Mann was charged with the theft, on the 22nd inst., of a fish, valued at 6d, the property of Charles Georgeson.—Accused pleaded guilty, and said that he was drunk at the time and did not know what he was doing.—Sergeant O'Neill stated that a constable on duty in Rattray street had seen accused take the fish and put it vinder his coat; He pursued him and brought him back. Accused was a sailor, and was unknown to the police.—Tho Bench did not like to send the man to gaol for so small a thing, and fined him 2s' Gd, and ordered him to pay the value of the fish. . Threatening Behaviour.—John Harrop. and John Hawkins were charged with using threatening behaviour in Princes street, whereby a breach of the peace was occasioned.—Hawkins pleaded guilty tinder great provocation, and Harrop not guilty.—Sergeant O'Neill stated that the parties were found fighting at 11 o'clock at night. The police were not in a position to say who was to blame, but both accused had committed a breach of the peace. —Evidenco was given by Alexander Gilchrist and Constable Taylor.—The Bench considered that a breach of the peace had been committed, though they did not know which of the two men was to blame. Each would be fined 10s, and costs. Charge of Using Bad Language in a Tramcar.—Henry Goodman was chaiged, on adjournment, with using obscene language in a tramcar.—Mr Solomon, for defendant, pleaded not guilty, and Mr Hanlon, who appeared for the prosecutor, Mr Henry G. Fleury, asked for a further adjournment to Wednesday. There had, ho said, been some misunderstanding about the subpoenas, and the witnesses wore not present.—Mr Solomon mentioned that the parties had nearly come to a settlement when the case came to court. There was an object in this prosecution as far as prosecutor was concerned, and that was to annoy and hamper Goodman in his business. Counsel objected to the adjournment, unless costs were paid.— After some discussion, the Bench decided that the case should go on, Mr Hanlon objecting to pay costs.—On this decision being given, Mr Hanlon said he would offer no evidence.—Mr Solomon: Well, I ask that the information be struck out, and that costs be allowed.—The Bench allowed professional costs, £1 Is, against prosecutor. (Before Messrs E. C. Reynolds and S. G. Smith, J.P's.) Breaking and Entering.—Prank Cannon was charged with having, on the 3rd inst., broken and entered the dwelling of John Mackio, and stolen therefrom 5s in money and a diamond ring, valued at £4. —Mr Hanlon defended.— Chief Detective O'Brien said this case was before the court, on Tuesday, when the evidence of the witness Eaton was taken. The facts ho (the detective) intended to prove were that Mr Mackie and his two daughters livod together in a house in Frederick street,, and their various callings required them to be absent from the house pretty well the whole day, the house then being unoccupied. On Monday, the 3rd -inst., they left as usual, and one. of the daughters, Jean, left a five-shilling piee'e in a purse, which she put into a drawer. The front ■ door of the house was secured by a spring lock, and they went out by the back door, which they locked. They also locked the gate that led into the yard from the street, the same key locking it and tho back door. Jea.n was the first to return, between 4 and 5 o'clock, and on going into the bedroom she observed that things had been disturbed, and she missed the five-shilling piece. Elizabeth came home later on, and missed her ring, but, thinking sho might have mislaid it, she did not trouble at the time. The next heard of tho ring would be told by a young man named Sorgel, who would say that, on the 4th inst., he met accused, who produced the diamond ring. They both went back to Shiel's pawn office, and tried to pawn. it. Accused wanted £S on it, but the pawnbroker would only advanco 30s, and they both left tho shop, Later on the ring was given to Eaton, who pledged it with Shiel for 30s. Miss E. Mackie would say that the ring was hers. On the following Monday Detective M'Grath met accused in George street, and told him he wished to have some conversation with him about the ring. Accused denied that he had been to Shiel's about the ring, and Detective M'Grath said he wculcl have tc arrest him on the charge of stealing it. Accused then asked, " "Will this matter come before tho court?" and the detective replied "Of course it will. It is a matter of house-breaking." Accused said, " Well, there was no house-breaking about it. I had a key and opened the yard door, and then I opened the window and got into the house. I do not know what made me do it." Later on, when nearer tho police station, accused said he only took the things by way of a joke, and intended .returning them. The bench had heard the way the ring was disposed of, and it was for them to say whether it looked like a practical joke. The key that opened the gate was found upon him. Among other things he said it was his intention to get 30s to take the ring out of pawn, and return it to the owner. Another thing he said was that ho owed Eaton £1, otherwise he would not have parted with the ring.— Evidence was given by Jeai\ Mackio, Elizabeth Mackie, and John Mackie. The latter said, in cross-examination by Mr Hanlon, that he did not think accused was altogether right in his head. Witness had noticed a serious change in him during the last year. He had grown morose lately, and witness thought he was mentally weak.—Evidence was also given by Ernest Sorgei, Samuel Shiel, and Detective M'Gralh.—Mr Hanlon said the case was a very painful one, and ho intended to ask their Worships to dismiss it. Accused was the son o£ respectable parents, who had lived in Dunedin many years, and he had been a clerk in the Savings Bank for a considerable number of years. This was a sufficient guarantee that he was thoroughly honest and upright. Unfortunately his mind had become weak, and he was not responsible for his actions. He had

already been committed to. tho asylum, and was there .from January .2Dtp March ,12 of this year. During that time he w&s usilcr curative treatment; Counsel submitted llV.it tha accused was not a criminal-at all. He wn'j :u such a state of mindtha-t he did not know t!ic consequences of his act.—Dr Martin, called by Mr Hanlon, said he had known accused for years. He had attended him before lie was committed to tho asylum, and witness was one of the medical rneu on whose.certificate he was committed to the asylum. Witness, examined accused on Saturday last, when he. showed considerable mental weakness. Witness did not seriously think that accused understood the nature of every act he committed,—To Chief Detective O'Brien: From . the examination on Saturday last, witness would not be prepared to certify that accused was insane and a fit subject to be sent to the lunatic asylum.—The detective submitted that the court had no power to inquire into the sanity or otherwise of accused.— Mr Reynolds said the Bench could not dismiss the case. They must commit accused for trial. Bail was allowed—accused in £50, and one surety of £50. ' • - •