CITY POLICE COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4048, 16 February 1876, Page 2

CITY POLICE COURT.

Wednesday, Febbtuby 16. (Before V. Fyke, Esq., R.M., and A. Mercer. Esq.,J.P.)

An Explanation.—On taking Mb seat on the Bench, Mr Pykeaud: Before entering on the business of the Court to day he intended to make a few remarks respecting a matter about which a serious misapprehension existed,, which be considered it due to himself to remove. In the course of a case of vagrancy heard yesterday by the Bench an argument took place between Inspector Mallard and Mr Cook as t» whether a married woman, although a prostitute, could be brought up and punished f»r "haying no lawful, means of support. The Bench ruled that marriage was a bar to suoh a, charge. Daring the few remarks which ' fell from him (Mr Pykr), he stated either thu if ail prostitutes who were married women, or all married women who we;« prostitute*, were locked up, the gaol would have to be enlarged. He failed to see any difference between the two phrases, although minue critics might do so. But his remarks had been misrepresented as reflecting on the general chastity of womwkind. He had no such intention in his mind, a and he could only ascribe tbiis mis-* construction to an imperfect acquaintance with the English language. The word "prostitute" had a distinct and well defined meaning—it meant a woman devoted to open and indiscriminate lewdness, and to ho other class did he aprjly the expression. In Lis magiflte ial experience, extending ove nearly a quarter of a century, he had become acquainted with the tact that a very large number of these unhappy women were mairied, and it was tolely of th»m he wa* speaking. His surptise was great, andjnis regiet greater, thutsci' gross and wrong an interpretation should have been put on his words. . , Dbonkennkss. -Thomas Alien was fined ss, in default twenty-four, hours' imprisonment.; Alice Howari alias Ruth, 40.-), or fourteen days'; and for using obscene language 40s, or one month. An Habitdai, Drunkabd.—Ellen Adams, for drunkennees, was fined 40*, with the alternative of fourteen days'imprisonment. Prisoner j had twenty-two brandy and bfer bottles in her possession when arrested. She was further charged with habitual drunkenness. Prisoner kept a brothel in Upper Maclaggah street, and scenes of a disgusting nature were reported to have been committed there. Prisoner was sent to i aol for three months.

Theft. —Bridge* Connolly was charged by Michael Sullivan, laborer, with stealing from his person on November 6,1875, a gild ring and money, the whole of the value of L 4 14si Prisoner admitted taking the ring, but denied tiking the money. It. appeared that she had for some nvmths been living with prosecutor, by whom she hod a child, and that wn n he turne 1 her out of the she took the money from him. He was then lyin* drunk on the floorsShe pawned; the.riog and seat him the pa*n ticket, and it was then he next saw it.—Tho Bench thought that under the circumataßCvS, proseputor's object was ia!her to putiish the prisoner than to advocate the law. The Bench wou ; d, therefore, inflict a very light sentence. P»isoner wa=> sent- to paol for fourteen days. Indecenot.—Wm. Brown and Brdget for itidceot behaviour on the Town belt, wen> sent to im three mouths. The female prisoner only camo out of g.*ol yrsfcrdiiy, »fter aoing three monthß for a similar offence. Family DiFFBSKycES. - Edmund Smith charged Matilda Smith with conducting herself, in hf.t house, on February 14, in an offensive manner, b > as to create a disturbance. Complainant also naked that defendant might bs bound over to keep the ptace. Mr Brent appeared for complainant, and Mr Barton iuBuuctedby Mr Stout, defended.—Mr Barton askedfor an a ijournmenc, the summons only hjd«|fcbeen served at a lata hour last night.— opposed the application, unless dofe" daub was ordered to leave the complainants house at once.— .ir Pyke : Do I understand that defendant is in hia house at present-?-Mr Brent Yes; a»d s so ci nducting heiself thai the business of the house cannot be carried on. Mr Pyke: Tneieis no information before the Bench, but I think I am light in supposing that he has a deed of Beiia\a&io3. % -^ ,Mx Brjnt: A decree of judicial sfparfttloo.—Hia Worship;

Mr Barton, will yoa undertake that defendant shall leave the pram ses if an adjournment be granted?—Mr Barton: No.—Hiß Worship: Then I mast go on with the case.—Mr Barton: Persons cannot be called upon to defend themselves at an unreasonably short space of fei»e.—His Worship said it was pasnog, through his mind that if a short ad>i journment were granted an amicable arrangement could not be come to to as to prevent a public seandal or exposure, which was very desirable. If the case was adjourned till 2 p.m. was there any possibility of .the' matter being amicably arranged?—Mr Barton would not undertake to arrange it. As he hai to obtaiu several documents he would beunab'.e to proceed with the case to-day.—His Worship J Will you per-suade your client to Lave the premises till the case is Fettled? —Mr Barton t visile insists on lemaiuiug, as a matter of right.—The Bench could not do anything und<-r the circumstincfls. The ctse mlis>, bd nettled to-day. -Mr Barton would ask the Court to ascertain, the exact time when the summon* wa* served. Defendant was living ; in compl inant's house both before and after the granting of the decree, aud hj w refused to leave the premises because cotrpl .inaat refu«e I to-give her WH. which he promised to do. He after wou'd move for a prohibition, as the Court insisted on the case being proceeded with in spite, of him —Mr Brent stated tht case. The decree was granted on,tie ground cf cruelty by the wife. Complainant only offe\e 1 to p\%ythe LSO referred to, provide! that defendant left the furniture in the.hoUße intact. I She; had removed the whole drawing-room suite of 'furniture, .the. - bedrooms had. been v cleared out, and .all the valuables had been taken away.—tte called Mary Baldwin, housekeeper to Mr Smith, who deposed th»t bhe remembered defendant coming into complainant's house on Mond«y, the 14th, at about a quarter to bix. She walked into the (Irawtng room, took the keys and' then came into the kitchen. She knocked witness's child about, and hi r. witt ess. She also threw a glass of hot w,iter over witness. She 'said she had : come uj for money,.and. would not leave' the house till she got it. . This Was after complainant p*me home. Complainant said the agiesment under which the money was to be given fod'not been carried out as die had removed his furniture; he( therefore declined to give the money. Defendant was very violent, and witnees.was afraid to return tithe house wi.ileshe was <here.—Mr Barton declined to cross-examine the witness, as the Bench forced him to go on with a ca e about which he knew nothing.—Complainant deposed that ha was manager of the Savings . Banki andwa» judicially sepciraeif com the defendant, who was his w fe. The douse was granted on the ground of craVlty on Ms wife's part, and provided that he should pay her I*lso, ayear in twelve instalment* of Ll2 10s each. He had fulilled his obligation. When he'found defiant in his house he ordered her to remove,, but she flatly refused, urging as a r eat on why she should remain that the child with her was unwell. He sent for Dr. Burrows, who pronounced the child to. be all : rinht. Defendant übedv. ryinsult nglanguage to hiiß. Defendant continued annovjng him till two o'clock in the morning. He had been advsedtouse violent measures for her ejeotmeht, but had abstained, and bow asked the Court to relieve' bint,:' Mr Barton proceeded to examine the witness aB to the payment of the LSO, whereupon witness produced a copy of thw letter. Hlb Worship wished to see the let'er in order to ascertain if it was fit to :be read in Court.—rMr Barton: Then, your Worship, I will not defend the case. The case is not being':fairly conducted, end the letter must either be admitted as evidence or it is not evidence at all. He w?s under a 7 great difficulty.—His Worship!' There will be no difficulty if yon will only control yourself.—. Mr Barton wouM only conduct his case in such a manner as to try and get another Court to over-ride the proceedings;— His Worship having read the letter, said it should be admitted. [The letter was read.: It stated,that complain-, ant was willing to give his wife LSO to enable, her. to procure household requisites, and stipulated that he should get possession of the house on January 1; hut that no articles except a sewing-m .chine and Mrs Smith's jewellery should be removed. ; The letter concluded thus:—''Further negotiations respecting thiß painful business would now be at an end.] - Hiß Worship hers held that the case should be adjourned.—Mr Brent aßked thit an order be pronounced compelling defendant to leave the premises.—His Worship declined to accede tothe application. The aspect the case seemed .to present was a quarrel over Lso.—Mr Bait n said defendant would go out of the house if Mr Smith would give her the L6U—His Worship adjourned the case tiil twelve o'clock to-morrowj . and hoped that a settlement would become to. in the meantime. Such exposures were, very ' painful to all the pat ties concerned. i ' '' ' '