CITY POLICE COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21198, 2 December 1930, Page 14

CITY POLICE COURT.

Monday, December 1. (Before Mr H. W. Bundle, &-.!&) DRUNKENNESS. Four statutory first offenders for drunkenness were before the court. William John O’Kane and John Gordon Secular were each fined 10s in default 24 hours’ imprisonment. William Leslie Lamb was fined 20s, in default 24 hours’ imprisonment, and David Charles Smith, who said he was prepared to take out a prohibition order, was fined 10a in default 24 hours’ imprisonment. THEFT ALLEGED. Aslin Buchanan appeared to answer a charge of stealing an accordion, valued at £3 10s, the property of Patrick Smith. He pleaded guilty.—Chief Detective Cameron said the complainant and the accused were in an hotel on Saturday. The former was playing the instrument. He was told not to by the licensee and he went out. The accused then played it, and was told by the licensee to take it away. Ho took the instrument away to a house in Canonfate. The accordion had been recovered, he accused was a hard working man.— The magistrate said that, if the facta were admitted, he would advise the accused to alter his plea to one of not guilty.—The accused, in evidence, admitted the facts as stated. He declared that it had not been his intention to keep the instrument. He admitted that he had not been willing to show tho detectives where the instrument was for some time. He said he was prepared to take out a prohibition order.—The magistrate said he would not enter a conviction against the accused. A prohibition order would be issued and he advised him to keep away from drink. An order to return the accordion to the owner was made. r*. AN INDECENT ACT.

A youth, whose name was ordered to bo suppressed in the meantime, wae charged with committing a grossly Indecent act in view of a public place.— Senior Sergeant Quartermain eaid the charge might be altered to one of casting offensive matter.—Mr Neill agreed to this and eaid hie client would plead guilty. The'senior eergeant eaid the accused was between 18 and 19 years of age, and had been under the influence of liquor at the time the offence was committed.—Mr Neill said the accused was not in the habit of taking intoxicating liquor, but on this occasion had been drinking ■with some friends. He asked for the suppression of accused’s name, as should the matter become public, be would probably lose his position.— Senior Sergeant l Quartermain said he thought the accused was a bit out of hand.—The magistrate said he would adjourn the case for a week, the probation officer to furnish a report in the meantime. MAINTENANCE. James Peter Jones was charged with default of maintenance, the arrears to September 9 amounting to £B9 Is fld. — The defendant eubmited a statement of his earnings and expenditure for the past two months, during which time be had paid £ll into court.—Mr Ward, who appeared for the complainant, wife of the defendant, disputed the statement.—The magistrate said he would not make any order in the meantime. If his conduct were not satisfactory the case could be brought on again at two days’ notice and meanwhile the defendant would be expected to pay as much as possible. Christopher Henry Stuart Boddy was proceeded against by his wife, Alexandrine Young Boddy, for whom Mr Irwin appeared, for separation, maintenance and guardianship orders.—Mr Irwin said he wished to put the complainant into the witness box, as evidence would be brought up which would throw a new light on the case, which had been heard previously by the court and adjourned. —Mrs Boddy said that she had been living with her mother for some time. Since the case had been adjourned her husband had been pestering her, and one evening he bad followed her to Cargill’s corner and had eaid to her on that occasion that he would not support her, and would not on any condition go hack to live with her. She did not think he was sober at the time.—Mr O’Shea stated that the defendant had paid £4 out of his last wages to his wife.—The defendant, in evidence, said that he had been forced to leave the house which he had been occupying owing to being in arrears in the payment of the rent. He had gone to live with bis mother-in-law, who had offered them a home in the meantime. He had met his wife a few days ago, and bad asked if he could see the children. His wife then alleged that he was leading an immoral life, and he had denied it. If his wife would come back and live with him he would be quite willing to support her.—The magistrate said he did not wish to make a separation order. He would adjourn the case in regard to the separation order and would consider his decision. As ths children must be supported in the meantime ho would issue a maintenance order for 35s per week. The question of maintenance would be reviewed when the case for separation came up later. Past maintenance would be fixed in th g sum of £4. THEFT. A young man, whose name was ordered to be suppressed in the _ meantime, pleaded guilty to a charge of fraudulently converting certain sums of money, the property of Patrick M'Comack, to his own use, thereby committing theft.— Detective Sergeant Nuttall eaid the accused, who Was not yet 19 years of age, had been working for a dairyman named M’Cormack, -near Wellington. It had been part of bis duty to collect money on his round. About £7 bad been used. The accused had employment to go to if he could leave immediately for the country.—The magistrate said that, in order to let the accused get away to the employment, be would enter a conviction and let the question of punishment stand down for a week, in order that a full report might be made by the probation officer, ■ The accused would be excused from attending the court when the case came up again. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. A man named John Frederick Hammcrley appeared on remand on a charge of disorderly conduct. He pleaded not guilty.—Constable Ogilvie said that on November 24, at about 6,30 p.m., he and Constable Simpson were on duty at the Exchange. They heard there was trouble in Maclaggon street, and went there. They saw the defendant with two other men. Two of the three were jumping about on the footpath and swinging their arms. They were close to the Phoenix factory, but they could be heard from Rattray street. When witness came up the men were in a doorway. The defendant refused to move on. He appeared to have had some liquor, but he was not drunk.—Questioned by the defendant, the witness said there were other people in the street. He could not say how many. The defendant, by his speech, showed signs of having had liquor. Witness could smell it. The other constable had endeavoured to arrest the defendant, who had resisted. He would swear • that there were three men in the doorway.—Constable Simpson corroborated the evidence of the previous witness.—To the defendant: The men with him were named M'Neill and O’Driscoll. When witness attempted to arrest him, the defendant had put his hands up to resist, and witness had thrown him down on the footpath.—The defendant submitted that the constable had no right to arrest him.—The defendant, in evidence, said that he had been in town all day, and had arranged to meet M’Neill and another man named O’Kane in Maclnggan street. On going there he saw O’Kane across the road, and he called out that he would eee him in a few minutes. The defendant and O’Driscoll, whom be bad met in town while waiting