PROHIBITION ORDER.

Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 133, 7 June 1929, Page 7

PROHIBITION ORDER.

MOTION FROM WHAKATANE,

WRIT OF CERTIORARI SOUGHT.

A motion for a' writ of certiorari to quash a prohibition order against John Laurenson, of Te Teko, billiard room proprietor, was moved in the Supreme Court this morning before Mr. Justice Kennedv.

The order was made on April 5 bv George A. Brabant and William M. Smallfield, justices of the peace, in imposing a penalty upon Laurenson on charges of drunkenness and assault.

Mr. Fleming represented the applicant and Mr. Hubble, on behalf of the justices, opposed the motion.

Laurenson had pleaded guilty to both the charges, said Mr. Fleming. He was convicted of drunkenness and discharged and was convicted and fined £5 on the assault charge. On their own initiative, and without any application or consent, the justices added the penalty of issuing against Laurenson a prohibition order for one year. The solicitor found later that the justices had exceeded their jurisdiction and applied for a rehearing of the charge of drunkenness. The justices informed him they could only reopen both charges and the solicitor decided not to take the risk of the »rave penalties which attached to the charge of assault. Purporting to find that the entry made by the clerk in the criminal record book was incorrect, the justices had it altered and the penalty of the prohibition order was attached to the assault charge instead of to that of drunkenness. The motion to quash the order remained because the justices had no jurisdiction for their action. A. n opportunity was given the justices to put the matter right but they would not grant the application. Mr. Hubble outlining the facts, said Laurenson, when in a drunken state had made a serious assault on a barm*.™ m the Te Teko Hotel. Ko answer had been made to the charges by the accused and his counsel, though both were present. A much heavier penalty won d have been imposed on the accused on h! assault charge had the court ~ decided to issue the prohibition order cretted r L dan f r ° US P rece would be co't t\l ordenn ? the i ustiee3 t0 P<^ "£ ° a T S ,? 0f a error, as asked by Mr. Fleming, said Mr. Hubble, ills Honor said the question of costs was the only one that called for con-' "aeration and he reserved Ms; decision.'