RESIDENT MAGISTEATE'S COURT

Thames Star, Volume XIV, Issue 4368, 3 January 1883, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTEATE'S COURT

THIS DAY

(Before H. Kenrick, Esq., E.M.) A NEW YEAR'S DETJNK.

Michael McLennan and Wm. Boxall were charged with being disorderly and refusing to leave the Imperial Hotel on the 27th December, after being requested so to do by the licenspe. Michael Maher, agent for Mr W. F. Mason, said that he saw McLennan knock the other man down. They did not go out when told i:o do so. The defendants said they had some drink io them, and had & bit of 'a, row, aad that wag all tltoy knew about if;. The £.M\ said the Licensing Act; gave the hotel'keeper power fco order, the defendants' to ioare the house, aad they disobeyed Uio order. The Court; adjudged a fine of 10s each and 7s costs ; in default, three days' imprisonment. BREACHES OF THE LICENSING LAW. James.Thompson, licensee of the Thames Hotel, was charged with allowing a female, ' other than his wife or daughter, to occupy the bar after ] 1 o'clock p.m. on the 21st December last. Mr Miller appeared for the defendant, and explained that Mrs Drew, a sister inlaw of the defendant, who acted as manager of the hotel, was in the bar about half-past eleven o'clock on the night in. question, owing to the landlord being tired and having gone,to sleep. ' The R.M. warned the defendant against a repetition of the offence, and as this was the first case of the kind which had been brought against him he would treat it somewhat lightly. He would inflict a penalty of 20s and costs. ANOTHEfi EBBING BONIFA'#k Nicholas of the Post Office Hotel, was charged with keeping his licensed premises open after hours on the 25th and 26th December. Constable Oharl^Sleight deposed that ho knew Mr TayloK At a quarter past one o'clock on the 25th he visited the Post Office Hotel and heard singing, The House was lighted up, and on going inside he saw ten men with liquor before them. Mr Taylor was present. Knew nearly all those who were inside; they were residents of the Thames. When the landlord was spoken to, he said as it was Christmas morning he did not think he was doing any harm. Ho then cleared the house.

By Mr Miller—Knew that it was a Cornish custom to sing carols on Christ' mas morning. Was not aure that they were not .singing carols, but they were more than half drunk.

Constable Hazlitt corroborated the evidence of the ..previous witness. Mr Miller for the defence said that the house was hot open for the sale of liquor. It was Christmas morning and several of Mr Taylor's friends had met for the purpose of singing Christmas carols, which was a Cornish custom, and Mr Taylor had provided liquor for his friends. No sale had taken .place. He called the defendant who made a similar statement. The Magistrate said technically tfie law bad been broken, but he accepted the

statement of the defendant that no sale of liquor had taken place, and be therefore dismissed the case. CONCEALMENT OF BIBTH. * Annie Stackpole, a not unattractive young person about twenty-two years of age, was charged with concealing the birth of a child on the 12th December. Samuel Alexander swore that between 11 and 12 o'clock on the morning of the 12th December he was in the bar of the Pacific Hotel. The cook came in and told Mr Curtis that a child was in the water at the back of the premises. Went to the rear of the Academy of. Music and found the naked body of ;i child with the the face downwards in the water. There were three boys looking at it. Reported the affair to Mr Curtis, who instructed witness to report the matter to the police. Saw a constable at the opposite corner, and told him of the affair. The constable returned with witness, and went to the spot where the body was found, and saw- it taken out of the water, wrapped m a tablecloth, and placed it in a box. Constable Hogg deposed that about 11.40 o'clock on the 12th December last was on duty near the Pacific Hotel, and from information received proceeded with the last witness to the rear of the Academy, * and there saw the body of a child in Che water. Subsequently saw the accused * and her mother. The accompanying constable made the accused and her mother acquainted with the object of theiig?- ■ visit. Went upstairs, and UonstabiS Herbert told the accused that,n body had been found, and she was suspected of, its maternity. She was warned that any statement she should make mig&>be used against her-. She stated that she had been taken ill,..and had gone bome'srith her mother and sister. She 1 s"ent for the doctor, who came about an hour after she went home. She said the cause of her illness was a tumour. Dr Callan told her so. Upon being asked what caused the blood stains in her bedroom, she stated that she didn't know, but Dr 'Gallant and her mother knew. Charles Curtis, landlord of the Pacific Hotel, sworn, stated that on the 12th December last before noon assisted in removing the body of a child from the #ater at the rear of his licensed house,' and placed it in a tablecloth. Oh the gangway he saw some blood stains. The evidence given by the two last witnesses was correct. Constable Herbert gave similar evidence to that of Constable Hogg,, and added that accused denied having given birth to a child. Cross-examined by Mr Miller—Was present at the inquest. The verdict given by the jury was to the effect that the" cause of death was want of attention at birth, owing to the mother being in a state of insensibility, and no one being near at the time: * Dr CallaD, examined, stated that on • the morning of the 12th, about three o'clock he was called to ; attend the accused, who was in bed. She was in a very low state from hoemorrhage, the after effects of child-birth; Did nob see the child, and its absence was not accounted for. Asked no questions' on account of the patient's weakness. Accused remained under his care up to a week ago. Two constables were there when heljfliade his second visit. The doctor claimed as a matter of privilege his ef emption from re« i-JP plying to a question as to what took place when he visited the defendant after the birth of the child. \ . Mr Miller contended that any privilege existing should be in favor of the accused. He cited authorities showing that' Dr. Callan could be compelled to answer the question as to what took place confidentially between him and his patient, but he held that the discretion of the Court could and should be exercised in not calling upon the doctor to detail what took place on the occasion. The Bench decided not to compel Dr ' Callan to answer the question. ' This witness was not cross-examined. Sergt.'Major Eiely deposed that early in the morning of the 12th he proceeded to the Pacific Hotel and saw a new-born child in a box. He', then, gave similar evidence to that' of the police^ men previously examined. On the 20th December went to Mr Stack-. pole's house at his request. Upon being shown into his daughter's room he heard that she wished to make a statement to him (statement put in, the gist of which was previously published by us). This concluded the evidence. Mr Miller addressed the Court for the defence, submitting that the evidence was not sufficient to warrant it in sending the case to a*jury. The while of the case ; for the prosecution was contained in the ' statement furnished by ttn defendant, \ which only proved that a child had been \ born, but nothing was shewn as to how j the child got into the water. \ His Worship said uo was of opinion that a case had been made out sufficiently strong to warrant him in sending the defendant to trial. He th^u briefly reviewed the evidence given, afterwards committing the defendant to take her trial at the next sitting of the Supreme ; Court. Bail was allowed, the defendant in £50 I and two other sureties of £25 each. \