CITY POLICE COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19697, 26 January 1926, Page 5

CITY POLICE COURT.

Monday, January 25. (Before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M.) DRUNKENNESS. A first offender was fined 20s, in default 24 hours’ imprisonment. Mary Jane Dixon was fined 20s, or 24 hours’ imprisonment. A SERIES OF CHARGES. Leonard Lanyon was charged with drunkenness, and with casting offensive matter in Cumberland street.-—He pleaded guilty.—Accused was convicted and discharged for drunkenness, and fined 40s, or 48 hours in gaol, for the other offence, Mr Bundle suggesting that in his own interests the man should take out a prohibition order. William Grove was charged with being drunk at Mornington, and with casting offensive matter. He was further charged with damaging a motor ear to the extent of 5s. —He was represented by Mr Irwin, and pleaded guilty.—Senior Sergeant Quartermain stated that there were several men and women about at the time, and that when placed in a motor car accused tore the celluloid curtains and did damage to the extent of 5s. —Accused was fined 20s, or 24 hours in gaol, on the first charge; 40s, or 43 hours’ imprisonment on the second; and was ordered to pay for the damage done on the third. Henry Savage was charged with drunkenness, breach of a prohibition order, and procuring liquor from some person unknown; further, with failing to comply with the terms of his release on probation. —Mr Gillies appeared for accused, and pleaded guilty on his behalf. —Senior Sergeant Quartermain stated that accused was pretty well known, and was an arrival from the Old Country.—Mr F. G. Gumming stated that accused had been placed on probation on July J I last, and on the whole he had been getting on “fairly well” until about Christmas time. He had “gone to pieces” since then. —Mr Gillies said that defendant was working for the City Corporation, and had a few pounds in the bank, but apparently the Christmas holidays were too much for him. The cases arose out of the fact that he had got drunk. He was to have been married the day he appeared in court. Apart from this breach, he (Mr Gillies) did no* think that there was anything against accused. —Accused was ccflivicted of drunkenness, the breach of the prohibition order, and with procuring liquor and was admitted to probation for 12 months on the last chargeBREACHES OF TRAFFIC BY-LAWS. Allan Keilor was lined 20s and costs for riding a motor bicycle at Brighton without a license. E. Goldthorpe was fined 10s and costs for driving a motor ear at Brighton without holding a license. Joseph Cross was lined 5s and costa for failing to keep a motor car properly lighted. . William Thornhill Evans was similarly fined for a similar offence. MAINTENANCE CASES. Louis Arthur Hutt, for whom Mr Irwin appeared, was charged with disobeying an order for maintenance, he being in arrears to the extent of £6 10s. His wife applied for a variation of the order, so that it might be increased. —Mr Bundle finally decided to adjourn the case in order to obtain a police report as to the accuracy of the statements made. Cyril Charles Marsh was proceeded against for disobedience of a maintenance order, his arrears being £ls 3s lOd. —Mr Hay appeared for complainant, and Mr Baylee for defendant.—Mrs Marsh stated that a separation order had been granted against her husband, who had only paid £7 under the order up to Christmas. — From the evidence given it appeared that the couple did not live very happily together, a reference being made to ' “cuddling in a right-of-way” on the part of the complainant with a. lodger, which she indignantly denied. —Mr Hay remarked: “Jealousy is the cause of the whole trouble.” —“Yes,” replied Mr Baylee, “and with some foundation.” —His Worship finally decided to adjourn the case for a week in order that the parties concerned might come to some arrangement. NEGLIGENT DRIVING ALLEGED. William Wishart M’Laughlin was charged with having at St. Kilda negligently driven a motor ear in Prince Albert road. —This case was continued from last week. —Defendant being sworn said that he came along Victoria road in his car at 15 miles :.n hour and slowed down at the corner. Ho pulled up close to the Boy Scouts. He went right up to the boys, but not amongst them. Someone at the back of the car, just for fun, called out “Dismiss!” He (defendant; had no intention of frightening the boys, or pushing them off the road. They should have movcil so that he could have got on further. He had not gone to where they were standing, but close up to thorn.—TV Senior Sergeant Quartermain: I would not havo gone over them even if they had not jumped out of_ the way. —Mr Bundle said that after having hoard the evidence he was not satisfied that negligent driving had boon proved. It was allagvxl that defendant iiad broken tho ranks of tho scouts, but he did not think that ho had. Ho thought defendant’s explanation was quite reasonable as to bis driving iro to the ranks. He (Mr Bundle) thought it would havo been wiser had the boys been drawn up on the footpath. Ho was satisfied that there had been no intention to be discourteous to tiio scouts. The charge would be dismissed