The daily gazette., 1879-06-03
oURTH EDEMlQN.
..ar. a, the Police Court

.,r.rrso cAsr-wnA1rr ,1rso ooSy nv
lSTkhhSr rrr NUISANCE CAUSED n'
p'soN'h"u III. Honor, Mayor Almond,
The seal ,nIes ll'I at the police hearing
Falyy Gc''Psss up Magistrate az o'Neil, last last
i'll. dIea md Iy that gentleman sat ia for td Two so
fnlus, ,,,s s before the session came " "''
\; n. e,., case was that of Joseph pl,, Var ar
\ IOe esharsed ' by Joseph sayeTS1 1 w,',' nv, an
|ut ana yo"rnail PARMA was discharged fYoin
|stedy, , man. named VIM. Muphey,.
\ your yn, arraigned on the charge %, o.
) next !.,' a dlsorderly house, which
Plll,a,,,7 nrrat nuisance to the nelshoors,
b EIya ae" Taylor street. The prisoner
10, 0',,sDnre,ented D.y by Harry gsharpley'
n; |k,ll;.,,.m Traub, the person who made
" NlIm,'Iainl NlI''a against Murphey, ana had
Co",l ,,iant issued for his arrest, was the
wa,,a.s ..i,ness. He testified that he anu
WINE WINE WHO live next door 70 the
c.aunr ,s"S' lad been given great annoyance
|isonts an.S ,,s which frequently congegat-
ss0rt soy"I fine door of the house IN qnes.
aOo"' "d ',a made use of much indecent
Pl' P,,a".' a',a lie recited several Instances
PIuos S""TJcr and said that several young
['as" u,'U,', .wore and caused a tumult sun
\ ''' uiaIa till after midnight.
|i,a.'y n'7 otLrr witnesses were examined
1a " III testified that there was more or
i" land swearing, but it seemed to
|sm ali that Mrs. Murphey was the one
nair use Of the most profanity.
v"nnp % man said that swearing at
,iMc. n va, very bad thing for man,
lman @ or child to do, but he could I.ip II
| y, 'r' Considerable, yet the way Mrs
"rbry swore got his time" The
t"nir. asking where his wife was, thi'
KIM man replied, "Aint here she's tt
nm icndin' 10 the young ones"
"n,bor witness testified that Muir
lars w il. could beat any woman swear
(c,l,, ever lived. EVIDENCE also mad'
snncar tllat it was a sort of house d
Tame. Daring the examination o
i,nc,,e, hy Esquire O'Ncu, he wotll'
Sria 10 putting the question, "do yo'
I'M i A nuisance" Mr.. Sharpley objee
| 10 such question saying that aceor
{nstolaw. no witness was qualified T.
|, whether a place was a nuisance
4 hi, ca,e it was the Esquire's position
| kdrrldr after hearing the evidence. N
Illnesses for the defence were called.
In treating the case, MIR. Sharple.
M that the law in relation to sue
~, so far astlr Mayor and Council al
bnrrned. with regard to deciding thci
a, laid down in the Ordinances Of th
E, and the Mayor must decide al
b,., according TO that. He then quote
b. Ordinance i'll relation TO disorderl
plsDs in which it imposes a find OF >.
any ole keeping a tippling, or pul
hoi,r, where people shall be allowe
drinkto drunkenness or behave di
tsrly. He urged, that while the PEE
be here behaved disorderly, it coul
N be brought under the head of
klisorcrly house, because the ordinal
related to public houses. There WI
|ui one redress and that was. civil actit
indecent language, or disturban'
lhc peace.
'IAr Magistrate said he was convince
bat this was disorderly house and
pnmon nuisance and would fine MI
hey. $50 and costs. Mr.. Sharpley gs
pi'e that the ease would be appeale
Two Young men named llaughey we
rn anaigncd for disorderly colidu,
pdy last sunday morning. The ca
a, dismissed,
Tie court then adjourned.