MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 3256, 29 June 1911, Page 7

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 28.

(Before Mr. W. A. Barton, S.M.)

DRUNKENNESS

One first offender for drunkenness was fined 5s and costs 2s, in default 24 hours’ imprisonment A TREBLE CHARGE. George Smith, alias Saville, a third offender for drunkenness within six months, was sentenced to ten days, imprisonment. The same offender was also fined £5, and costs 2s; in default twenty days’ imprisonment, for. a breach of a prohibition order. Accused pleaded guilty to a further charge_of assaulting Arthur Joseph Rushei. The Magistrate imposed a fine of £2 and costs 2s, in default seven days’ imprisonment. VAGRANCY. Harry Sweeney, alias Walker, alias Williams, was fined 10s and costs 2s, in default 48 hours, for drunkenness. He pleaded not guilty to a charge ot vagrancy. Mr. L. T. Burnard appeared for accused on this charge.. Detective Mitchell gave evidence as to the company that accused kept. He said he had warned him on several occasions, and witness arrested him on May 6th on a charge of vagrancy. He was convicted, and ordered to come up for sentence when called upon. Accused then left the town, but returned on Saturday, and had since, despite warnings, associated .with reputed thieves. He informed witness on luesday evening that he would leave town, but he did not do so, and witness arrested him. After hearing Mr. Burnard the Magistrate convicted accused, and sentenced him to three months’ imprisonment with hard labor at the Napier gaol. APPLICATION FOR RE-HEARING.

Mr. L. T. Burnard applied for a rehearing of the affiliation case. in which an order had been made against Harold Kirk. Mr. Burnard explained that the defendant thought the case had been adjourned for a month from May 19th, and thought it would be heard on June 19th, but when he arrived in Gisborne he- found the case had been disposed of. The whole matter had arisen through a misapprehension. Mr. J. W. Nolan, who appeared for the complainant in the case, said the defendant’s statement was not corroborated, and the Court therefore had to be careful in granting the application. He thought the. circumstances, were not such as to justify the application being granted. The Magistrate said that he thought it was a case in which a re-hearing should be granted. The defendant would have to pay the costs of the hearing, £2 17s, and solicitor’s fee £1 Is, before the date of hearing, which was fixed for July 7th. He would also have to deposit £lO that he would prosecute the proceedings without delay.