CITY POLICE COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22568, 11 May 1935, Page 2

CITY POLICE COURT

Friday, May 10. (Before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M.) UNLICENSED WIRELESS SET. For being in possession of an unlicensed wireless receiver, William M'Gregor Dickson was fined 5s and coste (10s). UNLAWFULLY ON PREMISES. Erie Pebles M'Donald, who pleaded guilty to being unlawfully on licensed premises after hours, was fined 10s and costs (10s).—A charge of a similar nature was preferred against Thomas James Harris, who pleaded not guilty and was represented by Mr M'Alevcy.—After evidence had been heard, the hearing was adjourned for a week to allow further evidence for the prosecution to be brought. MOTOR BY-LAW BREACHES. Hector James Alexander was fined 5s *and costs (10s) for being in charge of an unlighted motor car. Frederick George Benfell, an unlicensed motor driver, was also charged with failing to give way at a street intersection to traffic approaching from his right. —On the former information he was convicted and discharged, and on the other was fined 8s and costs (12s). For being in charge of an unlighted motor car, Frank M Ivor was fined 5s and costs (10s). Harold M'Kenzie was charged with failing to slow down when driving past sheep and with being in charge of a motor car not fitted with efficient brakes. 1 —The first charge was withdrawn, and on the second the defendant was fined £2 ss, with costs (4s) and witness's expenses (13s). ', . . Charged with negligently driving a motor car, Alfred Bruno Smith waß fined £5, with witness's expenses (16s) and court costs (10s), the conviction to be endorsed on his license. William Lindsay Stables was fined Js and costs (10s) for being in charge of an unlighted motor car. Charged with allowing motor cars to stand in Princes street for a longer period than waa required to pick up or set down passengers, George H. Claridge and Samuel E. Ferguson were each fined 10s and costs (10s). Robert M'Donald pleaded guilty to being in charge of a motor cycle without a number plate, and waa ordered to pay court costs (10s). DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR. John Joseph' O'Connor was charged with behaving in a disorderly manner in a public place.—Senior Sergeant Packer said that at 4 a.m. on April 18, a disturbance occurred in Jones street. For some time previously the neighbours had been disturbed by drinking parties in which the accused and a woman, whose husband was working in the country, were involved. On the morning the offence occurred, the accused had been ordered out of the woman's house and had refused to go, with the result that a noisy quarrel had ensued. —A fine of 40s and costs (lOs) was imposed. Frederick Richard Mowbray pleaded guilty to having behaved in a disorderly manner, and to having used obscene lanfuage 'in a public place.—Senior Sergeant 'acker explained that the accused was under the influence of liquor when the offences were committed. —The magistrate entered a conviction and ordered the accused to come up for sentence at any time if called on within 12 months, a condition being that during that period he abstains from liquor and keeps away from hotels. PROBATIONER IN TROUBLE.

Ronald John Crawford, for whom Mr A. G. Neill appeared, pleaded guilty to having stolen a postal note valued at 5s 9d, the property of Rita MTienzie, and to a charge of failing to comply with the terms of his release on probation.— Senior Sergeant Packer stated that the postal authorities had received a complaint that a letter posted at Oamaru by a man named M'lvor had not been delivered. Eventually it was found that the letter had been placed in the letter box of the residence where the addressee was working. The accused was ako working at this place, and inquiries revealed that he had taken the letter and a postal note which it contained. He was later arrested at Roxburgh, and, although he first denied the offence, he later admitted having taken the letter and spent the amount it contained.—Mr Neill asked that the accused be given a further chance, and called the latter's present employer, who stated that he was a first-class worker, and would be kept on if he were given a chance and would take out a prohibition order.—The magistrate said that the accused had been guilty of a despicable type of theft. He had some hesitation about granting Crawford a further term of probation, but lie would do so, and admit him for a term of two years, conditional on his taking out a prohibition order and making restitution of the amount stolen. On the charge of breach of probation, he would be convicted and discharged. APPLICATION FOR REHEARING. Allan Leslie Steven, who was represented by Mr B. S. Irwin, applied for a rehearing of the case in which he was charged with being intoxicated in charge of a motor car, the court having prohibited him from driving for a period of 18 months.—Mr Irwin said that it was always with considerable diffidence that counsel made an application of this sort. The defendant, however, was engaged in a milling business in Caversham, and had to go round the country buying wheat. He was at a serious disadvantage in not being able to drive his own car. He was not a drinking man in the accepted sense of the term, but was prepared to take out a prohibition order. He had compensated the boy whom he had knocked down, and the lad's father had said that the defendant could not do more than he had done.—The magistrate said that, it he remembered the case . rightly, the defendant was extremely fortunate in not being charged with manslaughter, as the boy might quite easily have been killed.— Senior Sergeant Packer suggested tnat if the application were granted the defendant should be prohibited for. the full period during which his driving license was cancelled. —The magistrate said that considering the circumstances of the case he would not review the sentence at this time, but would adjourn the case until August 9. DROVERS IN TROUBLE.

Alexander M'Donald pleaded guilty to charges of using obscene language and behaving in a disorderly manner on the Highcliff road on February 9.—Senior Sergeant Packer said that at 1 p.m. on the day of the offence a man named Crawford, similar charges against whom had been adjourned for a week, accompanied by another named Bell, left Normanbv with four cows which they were to drive to Tomahawk. They were picked up bv the defendant, and, on their way through the town, called at several hotels. They reached the Tomahawk road at 7 T».m.. and were all under the influence ot liquor, the defendant being the worst of the three. At the side of the road a resident had prepared a garden plot, over which the cows were deliberately driven. When the resident, a woman, remonstrated with the defendant he galloped his horse across the plot several times. The cows then got into some neighbouring property and did some damage, and, when the men were spoken to by the owners, they were abusive. When they reached Tomahawk their conduct did not improve. —The magistrate decided to hear the case against the other defendant, Crawford, and adjourned the hearing until Friday. CHARGES DISMISSED. Dennis Fleming Toomey, for whom Mr B, S. Irwin appeared, pleaded not guilty to charges of passing a stationary tramcar ancf of negligent driving.—Catherine Mary Robinson, a Hi«h School girl, said that she was stepping off the footpath at Braithwaite's stop, in Princes street, to catch a northbound tram, when a motor car passed and caught her a school-bag, knocking her over. —To Mr Irwin, witness said the tram had not stopped when the car came past.—Similar evidence was given by Moira Hichon, and Zoe Knight, also pupils of the Girls' High School. — Andrew Carter, a motorman employed by the Dunedin City Corporation, said that his tram waß stationary when the defendant's car passed it.—Mr Irwin said that the defence wag that the tram was not stationary when the defendant drove past, and that the girl stepped off the footpath without looking for oncoming traffic. —Evidence on these lines was given by the defendant, and Belinda Toomey, a passenger in the motor car.—The magistrate held that the prosecution's case had not been proved and dismissed the charges. BRAWL IN MACLAGGAN STREET. James Martin (Mr J. G. Warrington) pleaded not guilty to a charge of assaulting John Purcell on March 24.-—Senior Sergeant Packer said that the complainant, who was the principal police witness, was in Hospital and was therefore unable

to attend the court.—Mr Warrington contended that the complainant was not in Hospital as the direct result of the alleged assault, but rather as the result of alcoholism. He was prepared to go on with the case. —Dr William Evans said that at 8 p.m. on March 24 he was called by the police to a house in Maclaggan street to attend a man named John Purcell. He found the man to be suffering from a blackened right eye, bruised right cheek, and a cut upper lip, which was bleeding profusely. He also complained of tenderness over the chest and upper abdomen. Witness recommended his removal to the Hospital, and saw him there on several occasions. He still complained of tenderness of the lower ribs on both sides. —Evidence was given by Amy Maude Purcell, wife of the complainant, who said that while she was in the back of their house in Maclaggan street on the afternoon of March 24 she heard a noise in the bedroom, where she saw Martin assaulting her husband. He had his knee on the complainont's chest and was punching him. She tried to separate them, but, failing to do so, went for the police. In the meantime the defendant went to bed. During the past three years the complainant had seldom left his bed. —To Mr Warrington, witness said that the complainant had been told by a doctor that he was suffering from muscular rheumatism and creeping paralysis. He did not drink to any extent. The night before the alleged assault the complainant woke up out of a nightmare and grasped witness by the throat. She went for the police, but the matter was subsequently dropped. On the day of the" assault her husband had had a drink, but was not drunk.— Constable Mackie said that at 4 p.m. on the day of the alleged assault he called at the complainant's house and found Purcell lying in bed. He had bruises and marke on his face, and his upper lip was bleeding. The defendant was asleep in another room, but during the temporary absence of witness, the defendant, who was under the influence of liquor, left the house. Purcell was in an excited condition, but it was difficult to say whether this was the result of drink or of the assault.— The defendant, in evidence, said that at the time of the alleged assault he was renting a room from the Purcells. The day pTior to the alleged assault the Purcells were drunk, and at night Mrs Purcell ran out screaming "Murder! " She slept the remainder of the night in the washhouse. He saw Purcell at 11 a.m. on the day of the alleged assault. He was then drunk. Witness had one drink with him and then went out. He was drinking most of the day and had no recollection of going back to the house. He remembered seeing Purcell after 8 p.m., when the latter was sitting up in bed bleeding fxom the mouth. He thought Purcell had cut his throat. He then went to bed, and the next thing he knew was that the police were there and he was taken in charge.—Mary Amelia Wah, a laundress, said she lived in the Purcells' house. On the Saturday night prior to the alleged assault the Purcells did some drinking, with the result that late in the evening they had a row, and Mrs Purcell subsequently slept in the washhouse. On the Sunday she bought a bottle of whisky for Purcell, who paid for the liquor out of his pension money. She did not see Purcell again until after the alleged assault, when she was told by Purcell that Martin had hit him.—Mr Warrington said that Martin had not been before the court for several years. It was obvious from the evidence what sort of a house it was, and he submitted that it was not a case where an assault charge could be upheld.—The magistrate said that the evidence was not of an edifying nature. Had Purcell been a man capable of looking after himself, the affair would have been a drunken brawl in which all would have been equally responsible; but the evidence showed that Purcell was unable to leave his bed. He had no reason to doubt that the injuries received by. Purcell had been inflicted by Martin. The defendant would bo fined £2 2s, in default three days' imprisonment. LONG-STANDING DISPUTE.

H. J. C. T. Bennett _ was proceeded against on a private information by Walter Watt, who charged the defendant with using provoking and insulting language, and asked that he be bound over to keep the peace.—Mr 0. G. Stevens apE eared for the informant and Mr C. J. . White for Bennett.—Outlining the case, Mr Stevens said that Watt had some time been boarding with Bennett and his wife, who were now separated. After the separation, Bennett alleged that his domestic troubles were due to Watt, and harassed the latter to such an extent that Watt became incensed and assaulted him. Watt was then bound over to keep the peace, and under the protection afforded by the order the defendant had insulted the informant on every possible opportunity, and had done his utmost to make him break it. When the order lapsed, Bennett continued to level all manner of insulting allegations against the informant, and on several occasions made derogatory remarks concerning him at public meetings.—Evidence along the lines of Mr Stevens's statement was tendered by Watt. —The magistrate said that the friends and relations of the two men must be heartily sick, as he himself was, of the trouble between the two men. On the parties entering into a mutual undertaking that they would refrain from making derogatory statements about each other, either publicly or in private, that they would not act in any insulting manner, and that they would keep the peace, the case was adjourned sine die.