POLICE COURT.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXIV, Issue 4597, 5 September 1923, Page 2

POLICE COURT.

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 3. 1923. (Before Mr J. H. Salmon, S.M.) The following cases were dealt with at the Paeroa Police Court on Monday last;— NON-ATTENDANCE 'AT PARADE. Frederick W. Abrahams was charged with failing to attend parades of A Company Hauraki Regiment, at Paeroa. Sergt.-Major N. C. Busby gave evidence as to the number of parades the defendant had failed to attend. A conviction was entered, with costs, 7s. FAILING TO REGISTER. Trevor T. Crosbie wa,s charged witli failing to register under the Defence Act. The police stated that defendant had since registered. The defendant said that he had been working in the country, and it was due to a misunderstanding that he had not registered previously. His Worship said IJiat one could ve-y easily evade service for a considerable time. - Defendant was convicted and fined 10s, costs 14s 6d. IDLE AND DISORDERLY. An elderly man, Arthur Hornby, who had a number of previous conviction recorded against him, was charged with being an idle and disorderly person in that he had insufficient lawful means of support. Senior Sergt. O’Grady stated that he would not be admitted to the Old People’s Home at Thames. His Worship said that in his own interests defendant would be convicted and sentenced to three months’ imprisonment, without hard labour, in Auckland Gaol. OBSCENE LANGUAGE. Pomana Pirika, of Mangaiti, railway employee, was charged with using obscene language on a railway carriage platform at Tirohia on August, 18. Accused pleaded guilty and elected to be dealt with summarily. The police stated that accused, with several others, took part in a drunken brawl, and the language complained of had been used on the station. Accused had given way to drink. Nothing was previously know i against him. His Worship said thalt, such cases were becoming .too common, and if accused was brought up again he would be gaoled. Accused was fined £5, -with casts 17s, and given 14 days in which to pay. William James Holwell appeared on a similar offence committed at Te Aroha on August 18. Mr E. W. Porritt appeared for defendant and pleaded guilty. The police stated (that a complaint had been received from the Railway Department Ijiat a window had been broken in the carriage. On making investigations the damage was traced to the defendant, and also the disgusting language which had been used. Mr Porritt said that Holwell was about 19 years of age, and was a partial help to his widowed mother. He had gone to Te Aroha to collect some money that he had won at a sports gathering. He met, some mates from a flaxmill and they had a number of drinks. Accused did not remember using the’ language complained ;.f, and he was not responsible directly for the, damage to the carriage window. Mr Porritt asked for a probationary period instead of sending accused to gaol. His Worship remarked that bad language would not be tolerated. He hoped that accused had reason to feel thoroughly ashamed of himself. On account of the age of accused he was reluctant to send him to gaol. He would be convicted and admitted to t,wo years’ probation and ordered te take out a prohibition order. Accused was also ordered to pay the cost of the prosecution and witnesses expenses, totalling £1 17s. One month was, allowed in which to pay. On a further charge of being disorderly while drunk in a railway carriage accused was convicted and ordered to pay costs. BREACH OF STOCK REGULATIONS. H. E. Jones was charged with removing a horse from Area. B without a permit, contrary tp section 13 of the Stock Act, 1908. There was no appearance of defendant. J. P. Findlay, sworn, said that defendant had trucked a horse from Hijcutaia to Marton, but was unaware of the cattle tick regulations referring to horses. Accused was convicted and fined £5, with cOste 30s. THEFT OF BOOTS. joe Wickliffe, of Waitoki, labourer, was charged with the theft pf a pair of boots, valued at £2, the property of Joe Kingi, from Gillard’s hoardinghouse. Mr O’Neill appeared for accused and pleaded guilty. The police stated thalt) accused had admitted stealing the boots. Mr O’Neill said that the case presented an unusual feature. Accused admitted taking the boots, and knew that he had done wrong. He had a grudge against informant, and had stolen the boots as a-way of evening up the score. Mr O’Neill appeared for leniency, which, if granted, he felt sure would be appreciated. He asked that no conviction be recorded. Accused would pay the value of the boots and costs if given time. The police stated that the accused had been before the Court before on an assault charge. His Worship said that as it was the first offence involving dishonesty the accused would be convicted and fined £2, with costs totalling £2 Is ; in default one month in gaol. The boots were to be returned to the informanr, and £1 of the fine. One month was allowed in which to find the money.