CITY POLICE COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18766, 20 January 1923, Page 15

CITY POLICE COURT

Friday, January 19. (Before Mr 11. W. Bundle, S.M.) Alleged Theft of Motor-car.—A young man who was charged with stealing a motor-car valued at £9OO was further remanded for a week, bail being granted in the accused’s own recognisance of £loo.—Mr B. S. Irwin, who appeared for the accused, asked that the publication of his name should be prohibited, and this was agreed to.—Mr C. J. L. White appeared for the complainant. The Liquor Law. —Arthur Ernest M'Ginn, who had taken out a prohibition order against himself, was charged with having been found in the Oban Hotel. —When charged with the offence, the accused said that if standing on the step of the hotel talking to the porter constituted an offence, he must plead “guilty.” As this was taken as a plea of “not guilty,” Constable Bussell gave evidence. He said that at 8.50 a.m. on December 24 he saw the accused enter the Oban Hotel, and stand in the passage-way. When questioned by witness ho had said that he had gone there to see a friend, but would not give the name of the friend. Witness had thereupon said that he would report the accused. —In answer to the accused, Constable Bussell said that the former was standing in the passage, 10ft from the doorway.—The accused said that ho was not more than 3ft in the passage-way. He had gone there to invite a friend to Christmas dinner, and he himself had stayed et that hotel on several occasions. He may have committed a technical breach, but there was no ulterior motive in his being there. He would not have gone there for drink even if he had wanted it.—Sub-inspector Eccles said that there was no suggestion that he had got drink there.—The accused, on being asked if ho wished to call any witness, answered “No,” but Mr Arthur Paape, licensee of the hotel, came up from the body of the court and said that he wished to give evidence. He said that at half-past 8 that day the porter had told him that a _ sergeant at the door wished to speak to him. Ho had only two bunches ot keys for the bar, and at the time both wore in his own possession. The accused could not have been standing more than 3ft in the passage-way; in fact, he thought that the case should not have been brought up.—The Magistrate: It is not for you to criticise the action of the police. Please confine yourself to giving evidence of what you know. —In dismissing the information, Mr H. W. Bundle said that the police were quite right to bring up such cases, and it was not for a publican or anyone else to criticise them for it. It was a moat difficult thing to get the truth in these matters. The accused might consider himself fortunate in the information being dismissed. _ Charge of Breaking, Entering, and Theft. Arthur Gavin, who was charged with breaking and entering the premises of Messrs Briscoe and Co., and stealing 117 watches, 15 razors,, 75 packets of razor blades, and one suitcase, was remanded till January 26 on the application of Chief Detective Bishop, who said that there were several other similar charges pending. A Eacecourso Case. —Charles Robert M'Gregor, who did not appear, was charged with being on the Forbury Racecourse during the race meeting on December 2, M Gregor being a prohibited person under the Gaming Act.—Detective Lean said that about 3 p.ra. on December 1 he had seen the accused on the racecourse at Forbury Park. M‘Gregor hod then been removed and warned that ho must Keep off the course, but had returned on the following day, witness tlseing him there about 5 p.m. The accused was in a drunken condition" and was making a nuisance of himself.—Chief Detective Bishop said that Mi’Gregor, who had been a jockey but had lost his license owing to misconduct, had had three previous convictions against him, but as the police had expected the accused to appear and admit these they had not produced proof.—The case was adjourned till January 26. to give the police an opportunity of proving the convictions. Defective Drains.—Alfred Washer, for permitting the drains in liis premises in Begg street, Rcslyn, to become dangerous tohealtff, was fined 20s, and coats (7s), on one charge and 10s and costs (7s) on another. Mr Calvert appeared for the defendant. Failure to Attend Drill.—For failing to Attend drill George Stanley Petne was fined £3, with coats (7s).— Sub-inspector Eccles explained that this case had been adjourned to give the defendant an opportunity of attending parades, but he had -failed to do so. Norman Robert Veitch, similarly charged, was fined £2 with costs (7s)—The circumstances of this case, as outlined by Subinspector Eccles, were practically the same as those in the previous case. The defendant, after being given an opportunity to make amends, had attended only one out of the five parades held since he was first charged. Maintenance. —Mary Ann Morten proceeded against William Crawford Morton for the payment of arrears amounting to £3B 15s. — Mr Neill, who appeared for the defendant, admitted the order and the arrears, ana made application for a variation of the order. The defendant had been seven months out of work, and had got far behind with the ar rears. Then he had again been out of work for a fortnight after November 4 as the result of an accident. He had returned to work, but after being there for a day and a half his injuries had forced him to knock off again. At Christmas time he had been two weeks without pay, and the result was that he had got very far behind with the arrears. Counsel submitted that these should be reduced £2l to give the defendant an opportunity of clearing them off altogether.—The Magistrate reduced the arrears to £25, and sentenced 1 the defendant to three months’ imprisonment, the warrant to be suspended so long as 7s 6d a week was paid off the arrears. Albert Patrick Hargreaves, who did not appear, was proceeded against by Elizabeth Hargreaves for the payment of arrears amounting to £33 2s on one charge and to £25 Is on another.—The defendant was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment on each charge, the warrant to be suspended provided he paid £5 off the arrears and 39s a week thereafter in each case. In adjourning for the sixth time (owing to the nonappearance of the defendant), the case of William Aitken, who was sued for payment of arrears, the Magistrate said that if a case was adjourned the defendant must appear before the court when it was next heard unless ho gave some reason for his nonappearance. He had said, however, that it would not be necessary to appear if a day’s work would be lost as a result. Robert M'Gregor, who was proceeded against by his wife on a complaint for maintenance, separation, and guardianship orders, did not appear.—The complainant, for whom Mr Moore appeared, said that she had a family of seven, two of whom wore at work. The trouble with her husband was drink, and under its influence he behaved objectionably at home. He had been earning £l6 a month, and bad also been receiving a returned soldiers’ pension of £5 a month. Of this she had received £l3, and ho had squandered the remainder. He had been out of regular work for some months.—The Magistrate said that ho could not make an order on the grounds of refusal to pay. The evidence showed that the man had been out of work, and had paid £l3 a month to his family when in work. —The case was adjourned for a week to enable the information to be amended.