POLICE COURT —Monday.

Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 527, 18 September 1871, Page 2

POLICE COURT —Monday.

[Before His Worship the Mayor and Gr. S

Graham, Esquire, J. P,

Drttnkeness.—Six persons were punished in the usual manner for first offences ; two forfeited their bail, and Thomas Fagan, for a third offence was sent to gaol for seven days.

Bbbaob or Merchant Shipping Act.— Joseph Phillips was charged by Tl'otnas Chapman, male of the brig Alarm, with assaulting him on the 17th instant while in Auckland harbour. He pleaded not guiltj'. Prosecutor detailed the circumstances of the assault whiih it appeared was of a trivial character, and as usualin such cases arose from the mate's having insisted on the prisoner performing certain duty which he seemed disinclined to do. Prisoner called two witnesses who seemed to know nothing at all of (he matter, except that no scuffle could have tnken place without their knowing it. Prisoner admitted that a few words had passed. As therefore trie mute's 3 statement was uncorroborated, the Bench dismused the case with a caution to the prisoner. Breaches ov the Muxcipal Police Act. —Anne Jane Armstrong, a little child of between live and six years of age, was brought before the Bench, accused of burning inflammable matter in a public place, to wit, Upper Q.ueen-atreef.. It appeared that the child, in company with another, even younger, had lit a fire against the Army and ISavy Hotel, a woolen building, and if the fire had remained undiscovered three or four minutes longer, the place must have been burnt to the ground.— The Bench held that it was impossible to punish a child of such tender years, and that the parents were re!il! y the responsible parties, as they had tailed to look after the children. They therefore dismissed the case with a cau-

tion to the parents that any similar offences in future would be visited on the parents.— James Gorman pleaded not guilty of iillowing

offensive matter to bo drained on to the footpath of Symonds-street.—Constable Clarke and others, testified to the nature of the offence, and it appeared that Gorman had acted under orders. He w^b, therefore, fined twenty shillings and costs, and recommended to recover the amount frjm his employer.