MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, 6 July 1920, Page 7

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

THEFT FROM A RESTAURANT. I After being released on bail on Saturday night, George and Leslie Plummer appeared before Mr. T. A. B. Bailey, S.M., at tl|e New, Plymouth Magistrate's Court yesterday, charged with the theft of a quantity of cutlery and glassware from the restaurant of Kurta and Co;, Devon Street. William Mountford was also joined as one of the defendants, he having voluntarily surrendered himself. Mr. Bennett appeared for the defence and entered a plea of guilty. Detective Fitzgibbons, who prosecuted, remarked on the rifeness of the class of offence in 'New Plymouth of late. In this instance the young men had gone into the restaurant for a meal, and before leaving cleared the table of cutlery and glassware. I The proprietor missed the goods just after the men left, and informed the police. The men were traced, and the two Plummers were found in possession of missing articles. Mountford did not have any of the goods and was given the'benefit of the doubt, though later lie had ;een fit to be joined with his friends. ' Accused were convicted and ordered to come up for sentence if called upon within six months, and Mountford was ordered to refund 10a, the value of the articles not recovered. THE HOUSING PROBLEM. Mrs,, E. Patterson (Mr. Bennett) claimed possession of a house from A. Walsh (Mr. Quilliam). Mr. Bennett recalled that the case had been partly heard on June 21stj when the evidence was that the purchaser {Drury) required the house for occupation by himself and his wife. The latter was an invalid, and Mr. Drury's intention was to take his son, wife, and child into the. house with them. Defendant, his wife apd two jchildren at present occupied the whole of the house. In the course of examination at the previous hearing defendant was asked if he would take rooms, and replied that he thought an arrangement could be come to. An adjournment was therefore granted; in tiie meantime, however, no result had been arrived at. I. St. -T. Drury gave evidence that Walsh had h»en offered the exclusive use of three rooms and conveniences. Mr. Qnilliam said the offer of Drury was refused for the reason that there would have been no privacy. Defendant's children, nped 4 and G, were both delicate. Mr. Drury had brought the trouble 6n himself by selling his own house. Counsel contended that the bal- j ance in respect of hardship lay with defendant. His Worship said it appeared as if, a satisfactory offer had been made. If defendant could not accept this he would have to go out. He ordered that possession be given within three weeks, defendant retaining the right to use three rooms if desired. His Worship remarked that such arrangements of course could only be temporary, as they were hardly, ever entirely satisfactory. Under the present state of affairs, however, there must be some

give and take in matters of the kind.