CITY POLICE COURT

Evening Star, Issue 4109, 28 April 1876, Page 2

CITY POLICE COURT

Friday, April 28. (Before R. H. Leary, Esq., and K. Ramsay, Esq., J.P.’s.)

Drunkenness.— William Mills, charged •with being drunk at the Railway Station, was fined ss, in default twenty-four hours’ imprisonment. Alleged Robbery from the Person. Edward Hughes was charged, on the information of John Patterson, painter, with stealing on the 26th inst. eighteen bank notes, of the value of LI. each, his property. —Prosecutor said he was at the Queen’s Arms Hotel on Wednesday night, and had L4O in his possession, consisting of two LlO notes, and twenty LI notes. He changed two of the LI notes, prisoner being present. Accused had an altercation with him, and they went outside and had a fight. Immediately afterwards he missed the single notes, which he had placed in the inside pocket of his jacket. During the fight witness came to the ground two or three times, and prisoner always managed to get on the top. He had had a little drink and was somewhat excited. The LlO notes, which were in his trousers pocket, were not interfered with.—lnspector Mallard asked for a remand till Tuesday. Prisoner, on the night in question, had on an old suit of clothes, and he had no money; now he had a new suit of clothes. Yesterday morning he had changed aLI note. Detective Henderson would follow up the matter and ascertain where the clothes were bought.—The remand was granted. Charge of Theft.— T. Lambert, jockey, was charged with stealing, on April 27, one pair of trousers, one red shirt, one white sheet, and a Chinese jumper, of the value of 17s 6d, the property of Leng Cheng Wo. Prosecutor stated that he met accused while going through the Arcade last week. Accused followed him and entered his house after him. He then went for a policeman, and on returning found accused had gone, and he missed the clothes above enumerated. —Constable O’Brien stated that on the robbery being reported to him he arrested accused, who admitted being at the Chinaman’s house, but said that one of the men who were with him must have stolen the goods. The property had not been recovered. —Prisoner said that he merely followed accused for the purpose of having a “ lark.” When he knew that the Chinaman had gone for a policeman he “ sloped,” leaving two other men at the house.—The Bench was divided, and gave accused the benefit of the doubt. He was discharged with a severe reprimand.