POLICE COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 190, 13 June 1903, Page 4

POLICE COURT.

FuIDAY, Jane 12tU.— Before Mr. B, L. Stacfv-rd, tf.M. *sSL EOROUaiI BYEIAW3. George Bunion was charged with committing a breach if the Borough Bye-laws by loitering on the footpath in Devon-street on the evening of Bucdny, 31at May. Sergeant Hadiiiell pro-ecuted, Mr F>;zhtrbert appsarcd for dtfend' ant, and sad two other young men wero nisi c'atfied wiih the sume ffeice for whom hi w. s a'so appearing, ad 1 e asked that ail the cas=-s be takvn toge her. Hi -r^r. avca n; d JB«rt Brown were shen i-iiciiatly charged, and all three p'eided guilty.

Mr Fi ztierbiU't said the offenca had oeen committed in ignor-nce of the iye-law>", whiob, «s his Wo r ship wns nvir.', were quite new, and their provisions were ii't v-ry well known rs ;et. His clioLts wfie not guilty of my misconduct, nnd had no idea they woie doing auyihing wrong. They were nil repee'i-.blo yo'ing men who weuld see that no cause of complaint shou'd be givm in future. UcdeT these circutnstar.e??, and seir.g that these weie t!"e Crsi case 3 ur.der the bye kwp'he Eubmitted that a caution would meet the case.

Sergeant Haddrell said he had no •»it-h to press fjr a hsavy penalty, but bye-laws mu.t I e upheld and this congregating on the footpath must be ■t'. pped.

The S.M. said h'3 feh inclined to take | the view nuge-fced by Mr Fifzherberl, atd would merely convict and discharge the defendants. It must be understood, however, that in future he should feal severely with offen'fe'.s agakst the bye-lawe. J.imes McDonald wes charged with cbe same oft'encp, and, in addition, wih failing to move on when requested by the police to do so. Mr Fitzherbert app?i>r<d for the defendant, who pleadei guil y. S«g;-ant Tiaddreli said in this case the oilence was Aggravated by the refusal of defendant to mov.j en when requested, Blocking up the footpath had become a yery serious nuisance and was a g'eat annoyance to parp'e passing along, but when these young men refused to move when spoken to by a policeman, even if there were no bye-hws, it was a very serious matt r as they must kuow the p lice had their duty to do.

Mr Fi zhe;bfrs s~.i3 ths defence in this case was the asme as in tha others. The defendant was not awaro of the bye-laws and as regnrJs his rc-fu al to m'iV3 on he thought his liberty was being in'erforcd with and na'urslly did no 1 ; like if. The polica were to) always as ourteous as they might be and ordered people to move on in a way that caused irritvion and naturally this was nsented. The S.M. said he would treat this case the same way. Doubtless the obiact of the police would bs served by the pub'icity that would be giv n to the aiatter, acd it be ucdtrstood that any fu ure cases would be treated more S:ve;eH'.