CITY POLICE COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3284, 29 August 1873, Page 2

CITY POLICE COURT.

Friday, August 29. (Before His Worship the Mayor, and Messrs J, Brown and A, J, Burns, JEsq. t J.P.’s.)

Drunkenness. James Crawford was fined ss. Maintenance. —John Gately and John Tiche appeared, in answer to information laid by Benjamin Britton, master of the Industrial School, to show cause why they should not contribute towards the support of their sous, inmates of the Institution. It will be remembered that when John Gately and Charles Mulligan, step-son to Tiche, were charged with being neglected children, a couple of week ago. the Bunch ordered the former to three and the latter to four years’ committal, and gave the master leave to sue the parents for their support. They were now called on to show cause why they should not contribute. -Gately said, when let alone, his son was a good boy, but the mischief was that others took him away and kept him from home. He wished to maintain his own boy, and would give him plenty to eat and drink, which was more than he would get in the school. His determination was that if a man-of-war came here, he would apply to have his son apprenticed t 0 it.—Tiche told a different tale. He said that when lie married Mulligan's mother she had six children, and he now had two of his own, and thus had eight to support. He was a sawyer, but had been out of employment for eight or nine weeks, and had just fallen into a job. When questioned, he admitted that his wife owned some property in Mornington. —Mr Britton said it cost 10a a week each for their support, but considering the circumstances he would not press for more than os.—An order was made that the defendants each pay os a week for their children’s support, to take effect from the day of committal (August 19.) Destroying Shrubs.— John M‘Lor pan, David M .‘Lennan, David Dow, John Waugh, and William Campbell, lads between the age of seven and fourteen, were charged with destroying a quantity of shrubs on the Town Belt, without permission of the City Council. Banger Bain stated that while or duty on the 20tb mat., hia attention was drawn to

a large fire. On going to tbe place he saw the lads, and before they had time to get away, he arrested the three biggest, all of whom denied having kindled the tire. The reason he had brought the case into Court was that he had sp ken to the parents of the M'Lennans about their conduct, but without avail.—ln dismissing the case, the Bench -warned the hoys not to repeat the offem-e. or t hey would most probably be sent to gaol and ordered to bo win oped. Assault with Intent. —John "Robinson Mercer, a seaman, was charged with having, on the 20th August, assaulted Lavinia Nicholl, a little girl, eight years of age, with felonious and unlawful intout. Kill)-inspector Mallard conducted the prosecution, and Mr Joyce appeared for the accused. Lavinia Nicholl deposed : I reside with my father in William street. I am eLht years of age. I remember Tuesday morning last, the 26th inst. 1 ’was sent on a message to Mr Anderson’s bakery shop in High street. On my way I met the accused. He asked me if I knew auy one named Arthur Anderson. I told him I did not; I knew James and Miller Anderson. He said if t would show’ him where they lived he would give me a sixp.-nce. After showing him where they lived I went into Miller Anderson’s for my message. On coming out I again mot the accused, who asked me if I knew no other Anderson. I told him I knew Mr Anderson, the solicitor, who lived at Mornington. He said if I would show him where that Mr Anderson lived he would give me a shilling. At thii time we had arrived at the bottom of William street, near the road leading to Mornington. We walked on in that diiection as far as the cattle yards. When wo arrived there he asked me to go in the bush and cut him a stick, saying that if I did so. he would give me a shilling. I went into the bus>h. He followed mo, getting under the fence at the cattle yards caught hold of me by the arms, and then put his handkerchief and his hand into my mouth, making it bleed. [ Aitneas hero described accused’s proceedings.] < n ray attempting to go away, he said 1 was not to go till he did. 1 afterwards went to my father’s house, I have not seen the accused from that time till yesterday, when I saw him on board the Duke of Edinburgh, ship, at Port Chalmers. I immediately recognised him m the man I have referred to, although ha wa* rcssed differently to when I previously saw him. The dress he now wears was that hr had when he took me into the bush. The handkerchief 1 spoke of had red rpots round the edge, [Handkerchief produced and described by witness as being similar to the one used by the prisoner,] I have since been to the place in tbe bush which I spoke of. Detective Farrell accompanying me. I showed him the stick I got for the prisoner, and the spot where he threw me «own. 1 also showed him the switch which I procured for him. The one now produced is the one,—By Mr Joyce : It was 10.30 in the morning when 1 first met the prisoner, but I did not see anyone. On my way home I did not meet anyone. My father and Detective Farrell took me to the Fort. On going on board I saw the accused, hut no one pointed him out to me.—'l he evidence given by Dr. Alexander was to the effect that therr was no appearance of crniinal assault, and the way be accounted for ths appearance of some bruises was by the scratcaing of the linger-rails.—Margaret Nicholl: I am the wife of David Nicholl, ami reside in William street. I remember the morning of the 26tb inst. My daughter Lavinia was sent to Miller Anderson, the baker’s, about halfpast ten o’clock, When she returned she seemed to very much agitated ; her face amt lips were much swollen, and covered with blood. She said, “ Oh, mother, he did give it to me ; he did give it to me,” I subsequently examined her. My daughter wa* eight years of age in March last.— Charles Collier deposed: I am a laborer, and reside at the Universal Hotel [ know the accused, who has been living in the Universal Hotel, and who has occupied the same room as me since Saturday ni?ht. —(Sub-Inspector Mallard asked the witness a question about the accused having been brought up at Port Chalmers.—Mr Joyce objected to the question, and in support cited Johnston’s “Justice of the Peace,” page 17, sec. 51.—Sub-Inspector Mallard asked to ba allowed to put the question, as the gist of the case hinged ou tne identity. He therefore claimed the right of putting all questions pertaining to identity,—Mr Joyce said the witness might give all the surround ing circumstances without prejudicing the minds of the Bench as to the prisoner’s previous character, Ihe question was allowed. —Mr Joyce thereupon requested the Bench to take note of the objection ) He told me that he had come from Port Chalmers, where he had got himself into trouble for assaulting a railway porter and a police constable. I remember Tuesday morning last. I was working for two contractors in Maitland street, at its junction with Stafford street. While so working, between ten and twelve o’clock, the accused came and spoke to me. He was similarly dressed on tbe morning in question to what he is now. He talked to tne for about ten minutes, and then went away in the direction of the street leading to the Southern District School. I saw the accused at the Universal Hotel on the following morning. He asked me if there were any advertisements in the newspapers for seamen wanted for vessels bound for San Francisco or any other ports. I was surprised at his asking that question, as he had previously given mo to understand that he was about getting a situation in Dunedin. He also asked me to tie his hand, which was sore, with a white handkerchief. To the best of my belief the handkerchief had red diamonds spot on the border. I believe there were marks of blood upon it. The handkerchief now produced is the one I tied the accused’s hand with. Ho subsequently told me that he had shipped in the Duke of Edinburgh for Newcastle ; I saw hia things taken away.—By Mr Joyce : I will swear there was blood on the handkerchief. I never saw the handkerchief before the day in question. After three other witnesses had been examined, Mr Joyce intimated that he would reserve his defence, which was to prove an alibi, and the prisoner was fully committed for trial.