CITY POLICE COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4311, 20 December 1876, Page 2

CITY POLICE COURT.

Wednesday, December 20. (Before J. Logan, Esq,, and T. Black, Esq., J.P.’s.) Drunkenness.— Ellen Maitland was discharged ; Jas. Miller was fined ss, in default, twenty-four hours’ imprisonment; Edwin Arbuclde, 10s or forty-eight honrs ; Ellen Adams, 40s or fourteen days; James Reid, not appearing had his bail (40s) forfeited. Wife Maintenance. —Louis de Bouisaon was charged with refusing to pay an order made by Messrs Fish and Leary, J.P.’s, binding him to contribute 5s per week towards his wife’s support. Defendant said he had no money, and could not find work. —The charge was adjourned for a week to enable him to satisfy the claim. Stealing from a Garden. Hannah Brown was charged with stealing from the garden of E. O. Strode, solicitor, on November 9, a branch of a rose bush. Mr E. Cook defended.—Prosecutor stated that the principal witness, who was a married woman, and saw the offence committed, was unwilling to attend the Court. He could only prove the theft of the shrub, and was unable to proceed with the case in the absence of the witness.—As the accused was gesticulating wildly and wa) making threatening signs to Mr Strode, Inspector Mallard called the Bench’s attention to the woman’s conduct, saying that she was drunk.—Mr Cook denied this, but admitted that she was eccentric. On a previous occasion she had been brought before the Court but the case was dismissed. —The Bench stated that under the circumstances the charge must fall through.—The accused, as she left the Court, waived her handkerchief gaily, saying, “I hare beat them again, and I will go and take another bunch of roses now.”

A Disorderly House, —William Insley was charged, on remand, with- being the occupier of a house frequented by persons having no lawful means of support.—After Mr Aldridge had addressed the Court at length, the Bench stated that they were satisfied on the point of guilty knowledge. —The Bench considered the case proved, and sentenced Insley to one month’s impri-. sonment.—Mr Aldridge stated his intention of appealing, but the Bench stated that the accused would have to go to gaol tall proceedings were commenced. (Before I. N. Watt, Esq., R.M.). Breach of the Cjty Bye-laws. —George Thomas Sayers was charged with driving five horses with a vehicle rU.und the comer of Princes and High streets at ether than a walking pace—to wit, at a trot.—Mr Smith, agent for Cobb and Co., appeared for defendant and admitted the offence, but stated that it was impossible to comply with the letter of the law. Cutting down the steep incline in Princes street rendered it impossible to pull up at a moment. Cobb’s drivers were-noted for their carefulness, and the coach always announced itself to pedestrians. A similar case had been heard before Mr Strode some years ago, and dismissed. —His Worship said that with respect to the former dismissal he could net take that into consideration. Magistrates must administer the law as they find it, and, if the law was objectionable, then application must be made to the law-makers—the City Council in this instance—to have it altered. As this was the first conviction against the defendant, a mitigated fine of Is and costs would be imposed.