POLICE COURT.—Saturday.

Auckland Star, Volume I, Issue 114, 21 May 1870, Page 2

POLICE COURT.—Saturday.

(Before Thomas Kitclfie, Esq., and D. B. Thornton, Esq., J.P.s) DBTJNXBNNESS. John Walker, Patrick Houlihan, Michael Campbell, John IVtcGill, and Thomas Lawson, charged with, this offence, were each fined 5s and costs, or to bo imprisoned 24 hours with hard labour. Jane King, for a second offence, was fined 10s and costs, or to be imprisoned 48 hours with hard labour. INSULTING LANGUAGE. Darid Atkinson was charged by Henry Harris with having used threatening language towards him—to wit, that he was a loafer and got his living by prostitution. Mr. Wynn for plaintiff; Mr. Joy for defendant.

The counsel for tljo prosecution drew attention to remarks that had been made in the public press, to the effect that a warrant had been needlessly issued for the arrest of defendant, whereas it bad been only in consequence of the non-appearance of defendant in obedience to summons. That warrant had issued in the usual way.

Henry Harris deposed : I reside in Auckland :I am a Customhouse agent; know the defendant, and saw him in front of the Exchange Hotel, in Queen-street; was talking to Mr. Possineskie and another; defendant and another came up, and after a little conversation defendant called me a liar and a loafer, and that I got my living by prostitution ; Mr. Possineskio was two or three yards distant j he repeated the language. *

To Mr. Joy : Do not think I used the word " liar " in the information ; he did not cay I was living with prostitutes ; but got my living by prostitution ; do not know the name of the other man ; only as Charley I knew him in Hokitika j never heard mentioned Atkinson's name to Charley; did say that he was in the habit of keeping company with low Irishmen ; I did not say this to his face but behind his hack : Charley said on the occasion that he could prove what defendant said; Charley did not say he would punch my head ; my whole object in coining to the Court is to prove I am not the chai-acter lam accused of being j it is not to protect myself from defendant. ,

Mr. Wynn here stated that after this answer he would withdraw the case, this Court was not to be made use of for the purposes indicated by prosecutor. .

The case wai accordingly dismissed with full costs.

MALICIOUS INJUJIY TO PROPERTY ACT, 1867.

Thomas Hamilton, Frederick Sorners, and Edward Lyons, three very little boys, were charged with a breach of the above Act, in ■wilfully breaking pine-trees in the Government Domain to the value of one shilling.

Mr. Sheehan appeared for the prosecution, and stated that it was not- his intention to press for the full penalty owing to the tender age of the children. Great injury had been done continually to the shrubs in the Domain, and the Domain Board felt compelled to take .steps for its suppression. - in the present case a ' reprimand to tke ■, children would ba isufficient. t; : v ::: .•.

The j6ench .warned the children of the consequenceSj-and charged the parents, who were in Cgurt, to take care for the future. The Court then rose.