POLICE COURT.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 14054, 26 July 1916, Page 4

POLICE COURT.

A charge of vagrancy was preferred against ;i man named .Frederick CharhM howell at. the Police Court this morning. He^pteaded guilty. Sergt. ray said 1 that accused was found last juight, sleeping m an overt nriied truck "oh Kaiti wharf. Accused had said lie came to Gisborne from Auckland a. month ago,- and had. only been able to get a week's work. He] had a- married sister and a brother at Napier, and had .'written to them for assistance, but had received "no reply. , The Sergeant 'paid jhe .thought it \ras a- • genuilie ; casg of misfortune. There was nothing known against accused. — Accused said he had itried hard to- get work.— il is Worship 'cautioned and discharged accused, and •advised him to call at the 'Labor bureau. : Patrick Clearkin, for whom Mi* Buijiiard appeared, pleaded • guilty to a. jcha'rgo vox entering licensed premises Whilst piohibited. Ho was fined £2 and icosts .7s.- Accused j>leaded not guilty to :i further charge of procuring liquor.— Const. Henderson gave evidence that about 4.45 pm. an the 17th inst. he saw defendant and another man- named M.cDonald standing talking near the back entrance to the Masonic hotel. He suspected defendant was trying to get McDonald to obtain liquor lor him. .McDonald went through the back gate of the" Masonic hotel, and defendant crossed the road. ' Shortly afterwards defendant also went through the gate to the baric of the Masonic hotel: Witness followed, and saw defendant m the lava:tory. Defendant shut the door on seeing witness approaching. Witness pushjccl open the door, and asked defendant [what he was doing ttiere, as he ''was {prohibited* arid -lie i; inade no reply. 'There wasva bottle containing' sdmc beer jstahdihg hy defendant, who denied that jthe bottle belonged to' hhn. There were (evidences of the bottle just having been iopened; Accused siiielt strongly of jli^uoi', and admitted having had some jthat day. McDonald wa« not -there.: He ■probably 'had got awd-y while witness jwas delayed at the gate. -rTd Mr Jim--inard : Witness did not see defendant a«itnally. hahidling the bottle. AVitness had 'c.inghfc defe)dant before. They tried hard- to tind^the otheiv man. — Mr 13111*Jnard pointed : out that Glearkhr cotdd ■not have liad time to consume the liquor 'if it was procui'ed for him by McDonald. There "was nothing to sho'tv there was any connection between the bottle mid the fact that- defendant was m the lavatory. — -Defendant gave evidence that he had not been m the lavatory a nijntite before he heard someone coining, and he closed the door. He was suffering froiri:a complaint, and that necessitated him going to : the. lavatory. He ;told'tho n constable why he had gone there. He neither touched nor handled the bottle, and did not taste the liquor. --To Sergt. Murray:,' Witness had not inorked that day. He was talking to lithe man but did not know his name. He knew where the stables were m that street. He had not time to go any(where else. H*. had. not time to use the ja.vatory before the constable came and ordered ; him out. He did not see tiio .bottle ''before the constable picked it |u;p,— His 'Worship -said, no dbiib^ the' tircumstaiices wewi very suspicious, biit jas there was a doubt defendant was ■entitled to the benefit; 1 and the informa,tion M-ould be' dismissed. ' J ! —a—— ————mm ■ ■