CITY POLICE COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17328, 30 May 1918, Page 9

CITY POLICE COURT

■Wednesday, Mat 29. IBefore Mr H. -A. Young, S.M.) Prohibition Orders Granted.—A prohibition order was granted against a woman on the application ol her husband; and another was granted against a man on the application of nis son. By-law Casea—Alfred Wiley and Albert Suinmerell were each fined 6s, with oosts (7a)—one for cycling on a footpath in tne city, and the other for cycling alter sunset without a light. Breaches of Prohibition Orders.—Elizabeth Rack Ley, through Mr Scurr, pleaded not guilty to procuring liquor tor Charles Price. —The latter pleaded guilty to procuring liquor during the currency of a prohibition •rder.—The magistrate found both defendants efuilty, and convicted and ordered them to come up for sentence if called upon within «ix months.—-John Hussey (Mr Irwin) pleaded not guilty to a charge of procuring liquor during the currency of a prohibition order, and he entered a similar plea to a further charge of procuring liquor for John Morgan Pauley.—Margaret Pauley stated that on the 13th inst. defendant took two bottles of beer to her husband's hairdressing saloon.-- She asked Hussey to go away and not.bring her husband drink. Jtiussey said: "You take your hook and get out. Your husband is keeping the shop, and not you." Her husband got very drunk, and towards evening he was arrested and was now undergoing a term of imprisonment. Drink had been his downfall.—ln reply to Mr Irwin she said that she did not see Hussey go into the shop.—Complainant's little boy, John Pauley, and Constable Brownlee, also gave evidence.—Counsel submitted that the case should be dismissed. To suggest that defendant (a prohibited person) would go to the place in broad daylight with drink was not reasonabe. He was not seen going to the shop, but was in the shop getting some tobacco.—Evidence in support of counsel's statement was given by the defendant. —The magistrate said that in the special circumstances there was a doubt about the defendant haying supplied the liquor, and the information would bo dismissed. Alleged Forgery. — William Chapman IJoclici'ty was charged on remand with lorging the name of James Kennedy to a receipt, and also forging the name of " J Dteveivson to a cheque for £26 3s lOd and causing Mary Alexandrina Sutherland to act upon it as if it were genuine.—Frederick I isn, accountant for Messrs Irvine and Stevenson, states that accused called at the factory and said he was James Kennedy, of Sutton, and had called for a cheque for his rabbits Witness made out the account and gave it to accused, who receipted it and received a cheque for £26 3s lOd, which was signed by Mr Irvine, but. it had not been = by Mr Stevenson. He directed accused s attention to the fact that he could not cash the cheque, as it had not the other signature. He took the cheque, savin" he would call again later and get the other signature to it. —John Alexander Forbes, barman at the Oban Hotel, stated that accused had asked him to cash the cheque produced, and he told him to take it away as he was not allowed to handle cheques. ho came back later with three £5 notes and some single notes.—Mary Alexandrina Sutherland, clerk at the Taicri and Penin°uPPiy Company, said that acthe office on tiie afternoon ncJS e u oth inst ' after'bulking hours, and asKed ner to cash a cheque for £26 3s lOd 11 t to tho °^ llici ' received f 110 'f 1 ?' 11 £1 notes, some silvor, and copper which she handed to accuscd.of bto ™ n *° u > a Partner in the firm ot Irvine and Stevenson, gave evidence to to°s£n CCfc t h at he ha u not authorised anyone nedTst^"TlT h t Kenf he , had not autliorsied accused to collect a cheque from Irvine and Stevenson m his name.-Formal evidence as to the arrest of accused was given bv l)c----tective-sergeant Cameron.-Acctised pleaded guilty and was committed to tho Supremo Court for sentence. uu^n-mo Maintenance.—William Richard Lawson Wu f d ' ur f f l w }}\ the disobedience of a order of the court for the maintenance of his wife the arrears being £8 2s, to the Ist inst -This case had been partly heard last week but was adjourned.-Defendant put in the plea that he was suffering from ill-health and was out of employment—The maris', trate adjourned the case for a weX L enable tho arrears to be paid.