CITY POLICE COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 15998, 14 February 1914, Page 15

CITY POLICE COURT.

Fbiday, February 13.

(Before Messrs 11. E. Moller and T. Roa;,

J.P.'s.)

Drunkenness.—Franci6 Roberts pleaded " Guilty " to this offence in Fleet street on Thursday, this being his third offence w;thin the past six months.—Sub-inspector Fouhy said the accused had been six times convicted for this offence, and he still owed a fine of 20s and 2s cab hire on a previous offence. —The accused pleaded for a chance. —A fine of 5s was imposed, and he was ordered to pay 2s cab hire, in default 24 hours' imprisonment.—'Two first offenders were each fined 5s or 24 hours' imprisonment.

Idle and Disorderly.—Edward Roberts pleaded "Not guilty " to a charge that on February 9 ho was deemed to be an idle amd disorderly person, having' insufficient lawful means of support.—Sub-inspector Fouhy said the accused was a seafaring mar., but \iad been about Dunedin for tho past 18 months. Just before the recent strike he made a trip in the Warrimoo, and since then ho had done nothing and had spent a good deai of his time in the company of persons of ill-repute.— Constable Sorrell described the accused as e, loafer, who was in the habit of hanging about public-house bars, and was known as a " threepenny bar cadger."—Detective Hammerley stated that tho accused was u, cadger of the iowest class.—Constable Farquharson gave similar evidence.—The accused stated that he had paid his way where he lodged, and did not owe anyone anything. Drink was his failing, and he was preparing to submit to a prohibition order being issued against him.—The Bench sentenced him to three months' imprisonment and commended the police for their zeal in trying to keep tho town clean. Roberts was advised to take out a prohibition order •when he came out of gaol, as drink appeared to be his main trouble. Prohibited.—Jonas Hardy opposed an application bv his wife to have a prohibition order issued against him on tho ground that he did not keep her short of money, and yiso because ho oonsidered it would interwth his employment.—The complainant stated that her husband waa in tho habit of getting drunk, and when in this condition it was impossible to live in the house with him. —The order was granted.