CITY POLICE COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3793, 21 April 1875, Page 3

CITY POLICE COURT.

Wtonisdat, Apbil|2L (Before H. S. Fish and A. Mercer, Esqs,, J.P.’g.) '

Dbunmnmws _ Mary Moore, for this offence, was discharged with a caution. Vaqraxct.—Ro*e Ghee was charged with havmg nolawful means of support.—Mr Cook asked that she be remanded for a fortnight, as she had promised to quit the town. An adjournment was granted, the Bench giving her to understand that if she was not f away from the town before the expiry of the adjournment e _If Tere , Punishment would be inflicted.—A further charge for using obscene language was adjourned for the same period. l jl( I DOE V. I: HOOT A. LIORNSB. Benjamin Perry, proprietor of the Alhambra Hotei, was chargeS with having eold a quanfaty of liquor without a license. William i co °‘ tabl ®> said that on m company with Robert Wood, also a revenue constable, he the accused’s hotel, and there received two glasses of beer— the beer being given hi™ tom an «jj» « ft, .Sfi Wood corroborated this statement.—Mr Fish M.id there was no doubt in the minds of the Bench as to the accused’s guilt, and they were glad to see thepohce keeping such parties down Accused would be fined L2O, and he (Mr Fish others. that lk W ° Uld ** as a w “mui to '.4 9BADll^.— Alexander Hardy was charged mT “ Xnui r> for k-

Alleged Fraud. —John Griffiths was charged by Sergeant-Major Bevan with having fit/ ebrn "7. 20 * /«75. at Welshman’s Gully Shi? 1 !! 11 ° f and in doing so with wilfully concealing his book of account without of > is Pfopwty and L20o! witn intent to defraud- -A remand for seven SStecb* 8 apph * d fot by the PoMce and (Before H. Pastings, Eacp and A. C. Begg, /Wi LT ’°rf oS S^ LIS,Q -—Samuel Crafts, fishGeorge street, was charged by Revenueofficer Hogan with this offence.— The case was heard yesterday, and the Bench reserved its decision till this morning. They now stated that they.oonsidered defendant guilty of the charge ar.d inflicted a penalty of L2O, and costs.—Mr Hams, who had defended, resolved that if ’ future any person summoned for ’ . in selling asked him to defend th oiy-grog advise them to plea-'t < r -0 m he would what tb<#mturedof4*’ no matter Herejthere.were might be. , totur witness es A for the.defenoe

against two for the prosecution; but still he knew from the first that the Bench would give a conviction. —Mr Bastings: Mr Harris, we have merely performed our duty, and you have done yours, and have been paid for it. We have done and not been paid for it.—Mr Harris gave notice to quash the conviction, and stated that he would prosecute one of the informants for perjury.—Mr Begg considered Mr Harris’s remarks uncalled for.