MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 42, 13 November 1920, Page 5

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

NEUROTIC SENT TO GAOL

Mr. P. IC. Hunt, S.M., dealt • with the police cases in the Magistrate s Court y€ Jo)m a f>'crry, a labourer, was convicted of drunkenness, also ot resisting Constable A. Buston and using obscene lan ; guage. He wns sentenced to 11 days imprisonment.' ' , lr tr w Donald Walker, (for whom Mr. H. i'. O'Leary appeared) was chai-g|4 i - decent exposure in Church Street. Th Court was cleared during the heauns of this case. Mr, O'Leary said that tie case was more mental than criminal. It was obvious from the OTlde _ I J°® an exposure had taken place. Ihe m< suffered from loss of memory and was more or less a nervous wreck" . .He hart ITgiveup work a fortnight; ago and on the day in question some.liquor, wandered into Churcu Street md there committed the oflo On one occasion prior to his he disappeared from himself in Auckland. Ho did not know how he got there or why he went there. Evidence was called-in support of COU P" sel's statement. B^n's thnt there was no doubt that the man s health was bad and that. h« was suffering from a nervous breakdown. Had this been the only occasion whcn n committed the off once he would have been treated differently; but he committed the ofience twice, ond in the same locality. . Walker, was sentenced to three months'- imprisonment, to-ho followed by twelve months reformatio tT of Prohibition orders. A. M'Naughton and. P. J. Sheehy were each fined 10s. and 7s. costs. , For failing to attend drill. 4\. Nansan. who hod a Conv.ction for a similar offence, was fined «?• Rntt 7s costs- C H. J. Bartlett, G. Williamson and W. S. fi ? r ed and Te. costs: and 7?. Bissett, M. Pollock, T. .T. Wildermotli, E. L. Albrecht and E. H. Wilson, were each ordered 'Vf. Richardson, K. , a ? (1 if Pollock-were each fined 20s. and . is. costs for obstructing a parade.

SELLING BKEB TO A YOUTH. Michael M'Enroe, licensee> of the Thiatlo Inn Hotel (for whom Mr. h., JohnBon appeared);; was charged with sup plying beer to a youth 18 years of age. The youth went into the hotel and asked for a pint of beer ; the licensee was in doubt and asked him his age. Ihe lad said he was 23 years old, and he was served.' The police then came on the scene, and to the the boy said hi) was 19 years of ago. Some time ago he was before the Court and hiieu £}. for falsely representing Ins ago. Ihe action against M'Enroe followed as tha result of this. For the defence, it was pointed out,that the licensee ha<Ttaken all steps to ascertain the lad s age. He Magistrate said the publican had a doubt M io the boy's -ago and should have turned'him out. M'Euroe was convicted and fined 40s. and' 15s. costs.

INFORMATIONS DISMISSED. H. J. Webb, licensee of the Cambridge Hotel,- was charged with failing to admit the police into his licensed promises on Saturday, November 6., Mr \V Perry appeared for the defendant and denied tie charge. The defendant 6aid that on the evening m question ii« went with hia wife to a picture theatre, and prior to going lie arranged with a taxi-arivor to take him ana his wifo for a drive after he returned from the pictures. He got back to his hotel about 10 o'clock and went upstairs to bis bedroom. He ■ heard the doorbell ring and went downstairs* He fit'- I ** the taxi-driver, vrho wanted to know 'what time he (the defendant)-won d be ready to start. He said he would go and find out and returned to the bearoom to consult his wife. He returned shortly afterwards and told the tasidriver that they would "bo ready in a quarter of an hour. Just .then the sergeant of polico. ftsked hini why. he did not open the door.when the police knocked and-rang for .admittance. Witness said there was no reason why be should refuse them admittance, and as a matter of fact he did not know that the police wished to enter. Thero were two men in the house at the time named F. Sullivan and K. J. Smith, and Serjeant Martin asked them what they were doing; there. • They replied that they were wanting accommodation, flie two men did stay at-vthe hotel that evening l . The hearing of the case took up a considerable time, and at the close hie Magistrate said that there was _ a doui>t in his mind, 60 he would giyo the defendant the benefit of the doubt and dismiss the information. F. Sullivan and R. J. Smith, the men •who stayed at the Cambridge Hotel in the circumstances stated above, were charged with being found on licensed premises ofter closing hours. . Mr. C. B. O'Donnell appeared for both' defendants. Tho evidence was the same as in the; previous case, and the information | against them was ulso dismissed.

THEFT OP A" HANDBJSG,

A woman (for whom Mr. W. G. Mellish- appeared) was charged with the theft of a 30s. in money, the' total value 'being £5. The 'facts were that the complainant left her handbag on a seat in. Hannah's boot shop and went away. More her return the defendant's three-year-old boy, who was in the shop with his mother, picked up the bag. and handed it to her. Presently the boy wandered out of the shop and the mother, after finishing her business, missed him and went out, carrying two handbags. .She went to the police station and reported the loss of her child, whom 6he subsequently, recovered. Next day she loft for Feilding, where $>e child developed measles. The loss of the handbag was reported to the police, and the constable at jFeilding was instructed to interview the defendant'. When seen by the constable sho denied knowledge of tho bag, .but realising that. sho was placing herself in a false position, • she gave him full details of how she came to be in possession of the bag. She immediately came down to Wellington on receiving the summons and made complete restitution. Tho Magistrate said that had she told the constable a falsehood ho might have dismissed the information. Ho convicted her and ordered her to pay ,£5;