MAGISTERIAL.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXII, Issue 8272, 12 January 1912, Page 4

MAGISTERIAL.

ASH BU RTON—FRIDAY.

(Before Mr V. G. Dayi S.M.).

Civil Cases. In the defended; case Charles i&Maude (Mr A eland) v. George Smith • (Mi\ Buchanan).;, a claim of £12 55,." jiidgment was given for plaintiff tor £6, the amount paid, into Court. Henry Davis (Mr Acland) sought «w. order against Frederick Parkin on ,a~ judgment summons for £14.—The judjg; ment ; debtor said that judgment haai been given against him for the amount on October 20. Since then his earn- -■; ings had. averaged £3 4s a week. He had ten children, and was unable topay the amount. One of his family. was twenty years of age, and the others, were sixteen and under. One ;ivas earning 12s 6d a week, and the others .earned nothing. He had paid MiDavis in rent about £200 altogether.— His Worship said he could not make an order against the man, seeing that he had' so large a family. Violet Johnston (Mr Buchanan), applied for an order against John Barnes on a judgment summons for £3 19s Id. —The defendant said that judgment „ nad been given against him on July 28. He had three children,, and .the debt had been incurred for music lessons. He had paid 5s on the account. His earnings had not since exceeded 35s a week.—No order was made. Offending Cyclists. Lewis Soal, charged with cycling at night without a light, was fined 10s and costs. ..'■ „ ''.'.' John Spring, for riding a bicycle on ' a footpath, was lined 5s and costs. . William Griffin, for eyeing at night without a light, was fined 10s and costs. Furious Driving. John Crow was fined 20s and costs for furious driving on December 20. A Costly Throw. William Lennon (Mr Purnell) was ■ charged, on the information of the police, with throwing a missile—namely, gravel—on November 18. This case " had been before the Court previously, and had been adjourned so that the defendant might produce further evidence. ■ ■ j , Mr Purnell said that the lads he hoped to obtain as.witnesses were harvesting, and lie had not b,een able to get them. His Worship said he would. accept the evidence of the constable, and would convict the defendant and order him to pay costs. • An Information Dismissed. Ernest Lee, M.P. (Mr Lee), charged with driving a motor-car across the Ashburton traffic bridge at an excessive speed, pleaded not guilty. ' Mr Purnell appeared for the 1 County Council. \~ Andrew Christie, Traffic Inspector ior the County Council, said that on Fri-. day, November 3,' lie was on the bridge all day. Notices appeared on each end of the bridge informing motorists that they could not. cross the bridge at a/ speed exceeding six miles an hour. Witness was standing on the northern end of the bridge, when he saw a car cross from the south. He believed that Mr Lee was in the car. The car maintained the same rate of speed right across. Witness timed it by his stop-watch.. The bridge was 607 yards . long, and the rate was 13£ miles per hour. The car took a fraction over a, minute and a half to cross the bridge. There Mere other vehicles as well as pedestrians on the bridge at the time,, and, taking this into consideration, he considered tho speed dangerous To Mr Lee : There was another ear on the bridge at the time, and he timed both cars by the same watch. He had to I'watch a number of vehicles at one time, but horse vehicles, gave little trouble, and no exception was taken to a rate of eight miles an hour. The defendant went into the box, and said he was a ■solicitor residing at. Oamaru. He crossed the bridge on the day in question, and had with him a companion, who warned him of the by-law, and he also saw the notice at the end of the bridge. He had atspeed register, and reduced the speed as near as he could to six miles. He passed one car on the bridge, which was going considerably quicker than witness was. travelling. As he approached the end of the bridge, to avoid a block he.put ■ on speed. He saw tho Inspector alter this, when he was going at a much higher speed than he went on to the bridge at. The Inspector waved, and he allowed the car to run down. H« considered it impossible for the inspector to time two cars at once. When he passed the Inspector he was probably going at fourteen miles an' hour. It would be utterly impossible to drive a car at exactly six miles ..an hour. Defendant said he had a reputation in the south for careful driving. . ■ Andrew Christie, recalled, said he' stopped the watch as soon as the catleft the bridge. He knew when the car left the bridge by - the dip ot tbe road Defendant was travelling about ten miles an hour when he arrived on I the bridge. . ' j His Worship said it was impossible. |to judge, even approximately, the speed , of a car coming towards one, with the eye. The information would be dismissed. I Storing Liquor: £10 Fine Inflicted. Thomas Gibson and Bernard Kennedy .(Mr Kennedy) were charged, on information by the police, with keeping liquor for sale in the No-license District of Ashburton. Gibson was also charged' with storing liquor. Pleas of not guilty were entered in-each case. _' Sergeant Fouhy said that on December 23 Constables Martin and Anderson and witness visited Gibson's shop, and! wont into a back room. There he saw Kennedy and a man named Chapman, both being drunk. He found a keg of beer in a corner of the room on tap. Kennedy said the bet'r was his, and it was addressed to him. Witness sawGibson a night or two afterw.ards, and. he 'said then that the liquor was bisown, and that Kennedy had given it to- . him. Gibson asked if it was intended' ;to prosecute him, and said that if it was ho would Loll something he knew about the police. To Viv Kennedy — Witness thought that Gibson allowed people to come into his shop und consume liquor, and h& was iv the "habit of frequently grog;; shop,?. Witness had seen people going in and out of Gibson's shop who wouldi not go very far after lemonade. Constable Martin said that when he spoke'to'Kennedy, on the sth, he said; .that the liquor was his, and that he was treating his friends with it- Witness know of no reason why Kennedyshould purchase a ke S °^ h. eer or the purpose of serving his friends from Gibson's shop. Later, Gibson had told witness that the liquor was his. » Constable Anderson corroborated tho; statements of Sergeant Fouhy and' Constable Martin. The defendant (Gibson) stated .that

lie was a confectioner. KtJtmedy was an .old friend. of his, and about three weeks ago he told him that he would send him a five-gallon keg of beer as a Christmas present. A ten-gallon keg of beer was afterwards brought to the shop, and when it arrived witness, Kennedy, and Chapman had a drink. He denied' storing the liquor for anyone, or .keeping it for sale. His.shop was not «. place of resort for drinking, men. To Sergeant Fouhy^-The liquor was not given to anyone who came in, but * only to people who were the friends of witness and were respectable. After it had, arrived,, two or three bottles were given to a Mr Fitzgerald,who took them away. A resident of * Wakanui " had a few glasses. When the sergeant came into the shop Kennedy claimed i&e-beer, and defied the police to take it. '.". , " ' To His Worship—Kennedy could not get a five-gallon keg, and that was the reason,he got a ten-gallon keg* As far as witness could make out, it did not matterto Kennedy whether witness or Chapman got the beer, land he stated in a letter to witness that if he did not-. want it, it could be given, to Chapman. To Mr Kennedy—He did not, care -about having liquor in his shop. John Kennedy, the othf-r defendant, in evidence, stated that he resided at Mayfield, and was a general farm hand. On December 18 witness sent to Christ•«hurch for some liquor. Witness sent for a teiirgallon and a five-gallon keg of beer, and as there were no five-gallon-kegs available, only a ten-gallon keg was sent. He had intended giving the small keg to Gibson: The large keg was consigned to witness, and was given to Mr Gibson. To Sergeant Fouhy—Witness took no onel to Gibson's to have a drink. Once he bestowed upon another anything it was beyond his control. Witness was not drunk when the police visited Gibson's, neither was Chapman, as far as -lie knew. To the best of his knowledgehe did" not have a keg of beer at Mayfield during the last two years. He jhad had two or three cases of whisky during the last three years. Since the 23rd of December he had had eight bottles of whisky and four bottles of beer from Marsh's. In addition to these he had a- bottle of whisky, last night. To Mr Kennedy—-He had bt^en working for the Rangitata R6ad Board for about four months before Christmas, and earned £2 a week. His Worship dismissed the charge of keeping liquor for sale on the grounds' of insufficient evidence, but he would convict Gibson on the charge of storing liquor for sale. As it was the first offence of the kind in the district, he would inflict a fine of £10. The maximum penalty allowed by the Act was £50.