CITY POLICE COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20703, 29 April 1929, Page 3

CITY POLICE COURT.

O' " Saturday, April 27. (Bcfoi’c Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.) DRUNKENNESS. Henry Carter, who was charged with drunkenness and with procuring liquor during the currency of a prohibition order, was fined 15a, in default 24 houra’ imprisonment on the first charge, and 10s, with a similar alternative on the second. THEFT. John O'Neil pleaded not guilty to stealing an overcoat valued at £5 7s 6d, the property of John MTvinley. In evidence it was stated that on Wednesday night the complainant left his coat on the counter in the Octagon billiard saloon, but when he returned for it it had gone. On Friday evening the accused was found wearing the coat, and, on being questioned by the police, said that it belonged to him. —Mr C. J. L. White, who represented the accused, said that when the theft was committed the accused was so muddled with drink that he did not know what he was doing.—The accused explained that when he took the coat he was under the impression that it belonged to him, as he had one which was similar to it. He had been drinking heavily prior to and after the theft was committed, and had but a very confused idea of what had occurred. —The magistrate said that it was obvious that the accused’s action was the result of heavy drinking. He would be given another chance, and would be convicted and ordered to come up for sentence any time if called on within 12 months, conditional on his taking out a prohibition order against himself. A FOOLISH ACT. Alfred Cooper and Thomas Rodney Dodds, two young men, on whose behalf Mr C. J. L. White appeared, pleaded guilty to having wilfully damaged two railway carriage lavatories to the extent of £lO 12s 6d.—Chief Detective Cameron said that the two accused were travelling from Mosgiel to Dunedin on an evening train. Both men were under the influence of liquor, and on the way they completely wrecked the lavatories in two of the carriages by tearing the seats off. pulling down the downpipes, breaking the handrails, and pulling oil the taps.—Mr White said that the two youths, who were not used to drink, appeared to have gone mad as a result of what they had drunk, ami were not responsible for their actions. They were, as a rule, both well-behaved, and he suggested that in the circumstances their names might be suppressed.—The magistrate said that people travelling by tram frequently had a good deal to put up with from drunken men. Neither of the accused was a boy, and he did not see why their names should be suppressed, as the publicity would act as a deterrent to others. Each would be fined £3, in default 14 days’ imprisonment, and ordered to make good a - half-share of the damage.