CITY POLICE COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4280, 14 November 1876, Page 2

CITY POLICE COURT.

Tuesday, November 14. (Before E. ff. Ward, Esq., and J. Griffen, Esq., J.P.V)

Drunkenness.—James Leslie and Robert SteWart were each fined ss, in default twentyfour hoars' imprisonment j Robert Thompson 10a, or forty-eight hours'; David Tuppin, who wanted a chance in order to join "the teetotal," was fined ss; and for habitual drunkenness was sent to gaol for fourteen days.

ABUsraa a Wife.—Richard Daniels was charged with conducting himself in Walker street last night in a manner calculated to provoke a breach of the peace. Defendant was having some high words with his wife, when a constable interfered and apprehended him. —He was discharged with a caution.

Maintenance.—Edward Williams was charged with disobeying an order of the Court made on May 1 for the maintenance of his family.—Mrs Williams stated that since the order was made accused had been residing with her for a short time, but it was opposed to her wishes.—lnspector Mallard stated that this was one of those unfortunate cases in which the defendant spent all his earnings in drink, and the wife sometimes took more than was good for her.—lt was shown that the sum of Ll2 2s 6d was due, and an order was made for the amount, a distress warrant to issue in default.

Fighting. John Campbell and William Kerr, charged with this offence in Princes street, were each fined 20s, in default, twenty-four hours' imprisonment.

Neglected Children.—James Hill was brought before the Court, charged by Sergeant Anderson with being a neglected child. J t appeared that the lad was abandoned, and that his father led a dissipated Hfe. He was sent to the Industrial School for seven years, the police undertaking to see that the father should be c inpelled to contribute towards his support. Adelaide Mary Lewis, Florence Maude Lewis, and Samuel William Lewis were char ed with being neglected children. Constable Willis stated that he found the children roaming about Kensington. They had been living with a Mrs Rushton, in Melville street, who turned them out into the streets.—Mrs Rushton said that the father of the children asked her if she would keep them for three mouths. She replied, that she would if he gave her the money in advance. He gave her L 5, and she charged 30s a week, including schooling. When the father knew the money he gave her was spent he "cleared out." Being unable to support the children she turned them out into the street. Mr Ward thought the Benevolent Institution the best place for the children.—lnspector Mallard : The policy of tie Benevolent Institution just now is to get rid of their children as soon as possible by boarding them out. Ho would ask their Worships to express an opinion that it was inadvisable for people to take chaege of children in the manner Mrs Rushton h/id. To an evil-minded man it offered a premium to get rid of his children. '1 he police would take out a warraut agaiufit the father

of the children for deserting them.—Mrs Rushton said that Lewis told her that if Bhe did not hear from him she was to try and get the children pnt into the Industrial School, bo that they would be properly looked after.—Mr Ward said there were too niany cases of this, kind where parents left their children with other people, and the iState had ultimately to provide for them.— Inspector Millard, after thinking ovsr the matter, had doubts whether he could proceed against the father for desertion seeing lie had paid L 5. However he would apply to the Court for a warrant.—The children were sent to the Industrial School for the shortest time allowed by the Act—twelve mouths.

[Before J. Logan, Esq., and J. Griffen, Esq., J.P.VJ

Alleged Akson. —Andrew Grainger was charged withhaving, at Peninsula, on October 24 maliciously set fire to certain stacks of wood, his goods. Mr Denniston defended.— Charles Morrison, agent for the South British Insurance Company, deposed that he knew the accused. On September 7 last he made a proposal for fire-risks—firewood in stacks, situated .in a paddock on John M'Farlane's farm, Peninsula. The proposal was for LIOO, and was accepted. On October 30 the accused called on him and told him that on going to the scene of the fire he tound that half of the wood had been burned on the previous Tuesday. He said he did not know when the fire originated, and that he had not been to the place between that day and the Saturday before the fire. Proof of claim was lodged on the 4th hut. He claimed for sixty stacks, valued at L 36. Cross-examined: I told him that had I known the wood was in the bush I would not have accepted his proposal, and I declined to pay the claim. I also told him that I heard that six boys saw him rapidly walking away from the bush BUortly before the fire occurred. He said they must have been mistaken, as he had not been there since the Saturday before, —The case for the prosecution had not closed at four o'clock.