Police Court.

Southland Times, Issue 11630, 12 January 1891, Page 2

Police Court.

Saturday, 10th Jan. (Before C. E. Rawson, Esq., R.M.) AN UNLICENSED HAWKER. Thomas Snipe, a Syrian, was charged with peddling in the Southland district without a license. — Mr Henderson, who appeared for the defendant, stated that he held a license (produced) for Caversham. He came down to One Tree Point and, having no money, bartered Borne goods at the hotel for his re* freshments. He could not speak English, and not being acquainted with the la* thought that his Caversham license held good for the colony. — Mr Millar, Inspector under the Southland County Council, said Snipe was offering to sell to anyone in the hotel. There had been many complaints about hawkers annoying women of late, and it was necessary before a license would be issued in this district for the applicant to get two respectable persons to certify as to character. The case was the first of the kind that had been bronght before the Court, and he therefore would not press for a heavy penalty, but he wished it to be a warning to others. — His Worship imposed a fine of Is, with costs, 7s. JUVENILE DELINQUENTS. William Gardiner (aged 10), Thomas Gardiner (7), and Walter Fearn (11) were charged with having, on Christmas Day, 25th December, broken into the shop of Alfred Brantford, Tay street, and stolen therefrom nuts and almonds of the value of three shillings. — Mr Henderson, who apr.eared for defendants, said that there was a total absence of criminal intent, the boyß having taken only what they could eat. Their conduct was undoubtedly wrong, but the case was one where a whipping by the patents would suffice. — Sergeant Macdonell said that a window in Mr Brantford's shop had been broken last year, and he had placed a large piece of glass inside to cover the opening and make it secure. On Christmas Day the boy, Win. Gardiner, was Been to take a stone, break the glass and extract the nuts from the window. The eldest boy, Fearn, had apparently been led by the others, and he had acted very truthfully in the matter, but Wm. Gardiner was a bad boy. He had been before the Court previously for burning down a stable valued at 253, and he had also stolen a watch, but was not prosecuted in either case. A short time ago his mother made application to have him sent to the Industrial school, as she could not control him, but this was not done because she said she could not contribute towards his sup* port. — Mr Henderson submittted that it waa unfair of the sergeant to influence the Bench by referring to other charges not now before the Court. — His Worship said that as the boy had pleaded guilty, it was quite justified in order to show the Court what kind of boy he was. It seemed to him that the best thing to do with William Gardiner would be to send him to the Industrial school, and if the parents could pay they would be made to ; if they were not in a position to do so it could not be helped. — Mr Henderson appealed to the Bench to give the boy a last chance. — His Woiship pointed out that the offence was a very serious one, and punishable by a long term of imprisonment. If he sent Gardiner to the Industrial school he would be kept there till he was 15, that was for five years, and he would be under the control of the master till he was 21. He would, however, give him one more chance, but if any of the defendants were convicted again, they would either be »ent to gaol or the Industrial school.