CITY POLICE COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19803, 31 May 1926, Page 3

CITY POLICE COURT.

Saturday, Mat 29. (Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew. S.M.) DRUNKENNESS. Three first offenders were charged with drunkenness. The first did not appear and was fined 20s, in default 48 hours’ imprisonment: tlie second was fined TVs 6d (including 7s 6c! for cab hire), in default 48 hoTirs' imprisonment; and the third was fined 10s with the alternative of 24 hours in gaol. FAMILY DISAGREEMENT. Application was made to take further e\idcncc in the case of Lockett v. Lockett, in which separation was sought. iho case was partly heard last Wednesday.—Mr C. J L. White appeared for applicant (Mrs Lockett), and Mr Hay for defendant -Mr White reminded his Worship that the name of a man named Groombridge bad been mentioned, and he (counsel) now applied to have the man’s evidence taken. r lhat would give the man an opportunity of clearing his character.—Mr Bartholomew remarked that, if it were only to clear the man s character, the apolication had not much to commend it.—Mr White stated that there was material evidence as to drunkenness taking place in the house at Christmas time.—Mr Hay said lie did not object to anything that was reasonable. It seemed rather a pi,ty for the court to bo put to the expense of taking evidence at Feilding A good deal depended upon the demeanour of the witness. If Mr White could produce some people from Mornu.gton to corroborate the statement made as to drunkenness it might alter the whole position of the case. —Mr White remarked that that was surtny an irregular remark to make.—Mr Bartholomew said Mr Hay was only stating a propostion. His Worship added,that he would make an order (o take the evidence of Groombridge.