CITY POLICE COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19254, 19 August 1924, Page 11

CITY POLICE COURT.

Monday. At'GtrsT 18. (Before Mr H. AV. Bundle. S.M.) Diunkcnno&s. —Tliomaa Ldvinsatono, who did not appear, was fined 209, in default 21 hours' imprisonment, on a charge of drunkenness, and a first offender, who also failed to appear, was similarly dealt with. Thomas Henry Smith pleaded guilty to a charge of drunkenness. —Sonior-sergcant Matliieson stated that the accused had a. very bad record for drunkenness. —His "Worship, after mentioning that the accused had already been sent to .Uolo Boa, twice, imposed a sentence of seven days’ imprisonment. Chimney on Fire. —Cyril Montague Isaac wag fined 10s, with costa (7s) on a charge of allowing a chimney in his house to catch fire. Charge Against Motorist.—Clarence .Joseph Bernard "Ward, for whom Hr G. T. Bayleo appeared, pleaded not guilty to a charge of having been drunk while in charge of a motor car at St. Clair on August 17.—Mr Bayleo asked for a remand for a week. He stated that a material witness, who was in tho company of the accused, on Sunday morning, had gone to Invercargill, and would not return till Friday.-The remand was granted, hail being allowed in accused’s own recognisance of -CIO. Theft.—Austin ‘William Tliomaa Holbrook, who elected to be dealt with summarily, pleaded guilty to a charge of having stolen one watch and metal chain, valued at 10a, and one razor and blades, valued at £1 4fl, tlie property of Hugh M‘Evvan.—Chief-detec-tive Lewis described tho theft as a particularly moan one. The accused, who was out of work and had no home, was taken in ' by M‘Hwan, who was and old-age pensioner, until ho could got something to do. The articles mentioned were stolen during MTwan’s absence. The accused had been previously convicted for drunkenness, theft, and vagrancy,—The accused said he was in bad circumstances at the time owing to being homeless and out of work. He intended to return the articles as soon as he got work.—Chief-detective Lewis said tlie accused did not seem to be very strong mentally.—The accused was remanded till Friday for sentence. Alfred Thomas Bell pleaded guilty to a charge of having stolen two pairs of ladies' boots and one Panama hat, valued at £l, the property of the St. John Ambulance Association.—CMcf-dctcctiv© Lewis said tho accused was employed bj* Mr Shiel, who noticed that when he and his wife went out something usually went missing from the house or garage, On Saturday Detective Hart secreted himself in the garage where the accused was employed in washing cars, etc. When the accused was leaving he was carrying two parcels. He was accosted, and on the parcels being examined it was found that they contained the articles mentioned, which had been left there by the St. John Ambulance Association. Nothing was previously known against the accused, who was a married man.—The accused asked for a remand on hail in order to give him a , chance to get into communication with his lawyer, and then he would give full particulars.—Tho case was allowed to stand down till tho afternoon, when Mr Aspinali appeared for the accused.—On Mr Aspinall’s application the accused was remanded till I" rid ay. Bail was allowed—accused in his own recognisance of £25, and one surety of £25. Michael Joseph Shannon was charged with having on July 17, stolen one overcoat, valued at £4 15s, the property of Jjeslie Ncilson Harris. The accused, who was represented by Mr Baylee. elected to b© dealt with summarily. He pleaded not guilty.— Leslie Ncilson Harris stated that on July 1 " he was at a dance in the Early Settlers’ Mai.. He left his hat and coat on a chair .n the cloakroom. The articles had disappeared by 11 p.m. AVitnees saw the accused in the Octagon on August 11, and questioned him about the coat. The accused said that a man named Andrews was with him when he bought the coat. The accused eventually handed the coat over to witness. Daniel Andrews &aid he had known th» accused for six or seven months. Witness and the accused went to a boxing school on tile evening of July 17, and remained there until between 0.30 and 9.15. They then proceeded to a house at the corner of Leith and Hanover streets, leaving" there between 10.35 and 10.30. They afterwards went to witness s house in Hanover street, whero they remained till 11 o’clock or later. When Harris spoke to the accused about the coat witness advised the latter to hand it over, and this course was adopted. The accused <iid not say that witness was with him when ho bought the coat.—Defective Hart said that in a statement the accused mentioned that he had bought the coat from a- man whom lie know only by sight. Tire man said he was hard-up, and offered to eeii the coat for 10s. The accused stated that he had worn the coat practically every day after he purchased it, and also mentioned that he had been in the habit of attending the Art Gallery dances.—The Accused gave evidence that he was formerly an hotel employee. He was not at the Early Settlers’ Hall on tho night of July 17. lie corroborated Andrews’s evidence relating to their movements that night. After he left Andrews’s house be proceeded to the Wharf Hotel, when Harris" spoke to witness about tho coat the words he (Harris) used "were that he was indirectly interested in it. About three weeks ago a man offered to sell the coat to witness, who purchased it for 10s. He had never said that Andrews was with him when he bought tho coat. In reply to Chief Detective Levis, the accused said he arrived from Australia about seven months ago.—Wm. Campbell, baker, stated that Andrews and the accused wore at his rooms that evening, leaving between 9..30 and 10 o’clock. They finally left witness in Hanover street just after 10 o’clock.—Mr Baylee submitted that the accused had discharged the onus placed on him. The evidence showed that the accused was with Andrews till after 11 p.m. He submitted that the mere fact that tho accused had stated that ho bought an expensive coat for 10s went a long way towards proving that the statement was true. If tho accused were guilty he would not have worn the coat around town os he bad done.—The Magistrate said the defence was that the accused could not have been at the Early Settlers’ Hull at tho time the coat was stolen. It was very noticeable that though Anrdews and Campbell wore quite definite as to the evening on which tho accused was with them they were not too particular about the time. He was not satisfied with the evidence that it was after 10 o’clock when the accused and Andrews left Campbell, nor was he satisfied that tho accused did not leave Andrews’s house till after 11 o’clock. He was quite satisfied that the accused told Harris that Andrews was with him when he bought the coat. The circumstances under which unknown men offered articles for sale needed careful examination. He was satisfied that no man would sell a coat to the accused for 10s as had been described. The accused would be convicted, and would be remanded until Friay in custody to enable the probation officer to furnish a report. Maintenance Cases. — William Henry GrimKey was charged with failing to observe the terms of an order for the maintenance of his children, the arrears up till July 16 amounting to XtU.—Trevor Holland, court bailiff, stated that nothing had been paid since 1923. when the order was issued, and the defendant was really in arrear to the amount of about £7oo.—The Defendant, who stated that he was earning £i per week at present, was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment, the warrant to be suspended on condition that he paid £TO within seven days and JB per week thereafter until tho arrears wore paid.—Robert Ernest Powell was charged with a breach of a maintenance order, the arrears up t il July la amounting to ,-£6 3a.—The Defendant stated that ho hud done only eight days’ work since June 25 owing to ill-health. —A sentence of three months’ imprisonment was imposed, tho defendant to be released on payment of the arrears. An order was made that the warrant should not bo issued for 18 hours—— Joseph Hrotton Harrison was charged with disobeying tho terms of a maintenance order, the arrears up till July 1 amounting to £fi' jl r F. J. D. Rolfe appeared far the complainant. —Tne defendant was sentenced to 11 davs’ imprisonment, to be released on payment’of arrears. Wm. Sproule applied ioi- a maintenance order against his son (Wm. James Sproule).—Mr Hay appeared for the pi it. nti fl and Mr Baylee for the defendant—After evidence had been given an order was made for the payment of Os per week, with costs (£2 2s) against tho defendant.