CITY POLICE COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13263, 20 April 1905, Page 2

CITY POLICE COURT.

Tuesday, April 18. 3 (Before Mr 11. Y. Widdowson, S.M.) 1 Drunkenness. — Michael Leader pleaded < " Guilty" to a charge of having been found - drunk, and l was fined 10s or -IS hours' imprisoument.—Emily M'Sliilui, alias Richards, I was also fined lfe, or tS hours' imprison- 1 ment, lor drunkenness. Albert Jfoore, charged with having been dnmk and with refusing to leave licensed premises \vhen ordered to do so, pleaded "Guilty" to both c charges.—He was convicted and discharged ' 011 ilio first charge, a:ul fined 403, or ono f month's imprisonment, 011 the other. 1 A r agrjir.cy.—John Condon pleaded "Guilty" I to a chaivjo of being an idle and disorderly : person, without sufficient lawful means of support.—lt was stated by tile oolico that the accused had been v.-anderiiig about town , for some <lavs without anv llxed piace of * abode—A sentence of one month's imprisonment, with hard labour,' was imposed. Maintenance.—Charles East was charged v.'ith failing to comply -with an- order of the ecurt ordering him io contribute towards the 'I support of his children in the Industrial School, and with being £28 10s in arrears.— " Defendant did not appear, and was fined 20s !■' or 1( days' imprisonment. tl Truancy.— A caso against David Houston si 0! failing to send his child to school a sufii- {t 'j cicnt number of times, which had been ad- jj joiirned for the production of a medical certifi- j> r.'lp certifying the child io be unfit to attend sx'iiool, was dismissed, the certificate being -J' 1 produced. On two other similar charges the ''' liifendant was fined us in cacli case. Mary Is Orrv was similarly charged.—Mr Irwin ap- ai poared -lnr the defendant, who pleaded "Kol hi guilty," the defence being that the mother jn had been deserted by her husband, and was al destitute, so that the child had not even 1 clothes enough to go to school in.—The defendant was finc-d ss, without costs. Railway By-law Charges.—John Watson, 'V jim., for whom Mr Hanlon appeared, was charged with having travelled from Port Glial- as niers to Burkes'on a railway train, and with pi having failed to give up iiis ticket tn be b( marked when requested to do so.-Mr S, 1\ M. Fraser, appearing for. the Kailwiy Departwent, said the • facts were that the guard , neglected to snip the defendant's 12-trip ™ ticket, and called (ho stationmaster's at ten- y, tion jit Burke's'to'the fact. The defendant, when questioned by the stationuiastcr, said' ar

- \ »? that the ticket lisd bsen snipped. The guard jJJ was quite positive it had not.—The defenoo 7 was that thero was no evidence to support the inforriiation, which charged .the defendant with failing to give up bis ticket on demand. Thero was no evidence that the stationnwsler demanded the ticket, and was refused. All ho did was to question the defendant, who said that his ticket had already been snipped by the guard. Further, there was no reason why _ the young man should defraud the railway. There -was still three rides available to him, which he had not used in the time allowed for the use of the ticket, and so cc-uld not 0 [ use; so that there could be 110 question of m any fraudulent intention.—The defendant [ r slated that the ticket'was snipped' by'tho guard at St. Leonards.—The case was dis, missed.—George Harold was similarly in charged in respect of a like offence between Ilavensboiirne and Duuedin.—Mr Irwin a.p----1,. peared for the defendant, who pleaded " Not j r guilty."—Mr Eraser said that the defcudant in this caso had the usual 12-trip commuta- ); lion ticket. Ho had been in the habit of nr placing it in the leather caso of a season in tickot. Two days before the present inforin mation was laid, when asked, for his ticket, ;h bo isaid he had a season ticket. He had re--10 fused 011 one occasion to produoc his ticket.— The defence was that the information was se faulty, in that there was no evidence that the r- defendant had ever refused '.0 give up his id iickel when requested to do so by the stationid master, who did not appear; and, further, n. lliero was no evidence that defendant was the e- possessor of a 19-lrip ticket.—Tho defendant 's was fined 20s and cods, n- Trespass 011 Wingatui Course.— William Irwin Black was charged with trespassing on e- the Wingatui Racecourse 011 February 21, '<• aii.l neglecting and refusing to leave when ordered to do so. A second charge of comv. mil ting a similar offence 011 February 25 was 'l preferred—Mr Williams appeared to pro- ~ secute, and Mr Irwin represented the defendant, who pleaded " Guilty" to both charges.— )r Mr Irwin said that the defendant had now ~ got a. billet in Christchurch, and would not, lie thought, be on the racecourse' again. He asked thai a small fine should he inflicted.— The defendant was fined £5 ant! costs 011 the 0 first charge, and 40s and costs on tho second. Arthur Sloddart was charged with ' committing similar offences on the same j dates, and pleaded " Guilty."—Ho was fined j g £j and costs 011 each charge. Walter Goodman was similarly charged, and pleaded Ij "Guilty." He said He left the coursc when | e ordered lo do so. He was now employed at 11 the freezing works.—A fine of io and costs [0 was imposed.—Thomas Torpy was charged with committing a like offence on February !. 22.—Mr W. C. MacCregor represented the ic> accused, who pleaded " Not guilty."—Formal it evidence was given by the secretary of the ie Jockey Club (Mr Harry L. James).—Ernest it Joseph Donoghue (a private detective, in tho ■e employ of the Jockey Club) said he warned 10 defendant off the course at 1.20 011 the dato ;e in question.—Francis Meenan said he was 0 with the last witness on the 22nd of February, iy and heard tho defendant ordered to leave tho g course.—Samuel Kraetzer (private detective g employed by the Jockey Club) said he saw tho ie defendant at Wingatui after 2 o'clock on y February 22.—Chief Detective Herbert also s gave evidence—Mr W. C. MacGregor, for the it defence, said tho defendant admitted all tho 3- facts—that he wa3 ordered off and left, and d then went back for a- moment to see tho ft star: for the Cup. not for the purpose of 0 bookmaking. Ho finally left on seeing tho 0 detectives approaching. Counsel submitted 3 that 110 offence had been committed. As •" shown by a previous case, the essence of tho " offence lay in a refusal to feave when ordered; r and that element was wanting here.—His ! i Worship reserved decision. r Polluting the Water Supply.—The adjourned case of the Corporation against James Booth, 0 in which the defendant was charged with 0 allowing foul drainage from his dairy farm f 1 lo pollute Ross Creek, was called on.—Mr W. C. MacGregor appeared for the corporation r and Mr Hanlon for defendant.—The report. ' of the, city engineer showed that- something had been done by the defendant fo improve ( i me.tters, but not enough— The Magistrate said that he thought that under the peculiar cir,l cumstances of tho case, toe man's farm being 1 in tho watershed of the creek whic'u led to 'j the reservoir, and it being very difficult to ( avoid pollution, tho corporation should assist .. the man to some extent by showing him how 'j to abate the nuisance, so that he might not c spend money perhaps in the wrong direction. [. uis Worship intimated that 110 intended lo 0 show some leniency, and the defendant v/aa fined 40s and costs (£6 19s). ;• Wednesday, April 19. f (Before Mr C. C. Graham, S.M.) Drunkenness.—For this offence August Hofife mann, who pleaded " Guilty" when charged 011 5 remand, for whom Mr Irwin appeared, was - fined 20s, with costs (12s), or, in default, 24 D hours' imprisonment. j By-law Infringements.—For allowing three horses in wander at largo in Cameron street, 1 South Dunedin, Allan Johnston was fined Is, 1 and costs (7s), being similarly lined in respect [ to a further charge of allowing & horse, of I- which he was the owner, to trespass on part [ of the Government railway open for traffic. j Maintenance.—David Hood, who did not apj pear, was charged with failing- to comply with an order of the court for tho maintenance of his wife.—Mr D. D. Sfaedonald (instructed byi Mr Moore) appeared for the complainant.— Defendant- was ordered lo make payment of arrears, and was fined 20s, and costs, in defa.ult seven, days' imprisonment.