MAGISTERIAL.

Press, Volume LV, Issue 16702, 10 December 1919, Page 4

MAGISTERIAL.

Before Mr S. E. McCarthy, S.M.) ASSAULT. William Williamsc.-!. who had pleaded frailty the jircvioui week to asiulunWilliamson, apfri seven yoara, by etrikia? hfr on tbo forehead with tbo Loci of a siicc, camo up for 6eiitonc<\ Mr C. S. Thomas paid accused did not wish to say anything in justification of his action, but tli? position was this: Accused raid thai things wore not altogether happy as far as hie homo lifts was concerned. He had the rah /or tunc to h»v« a wife who nagged. On tbo in question, in company with a friend, ho came cot of tbo botel in which ho was employed. There wa* a yfwnc woman standing at the eorr.er, and accuood* friend went <rvr?r to her whilst accused vcai on. His wifo waa standing nw, and when ho reached her she said: "I h.rvc caught you at last" Accused told her not lo be si'l'y. but fhe went on nacgins, and continued na;,'pin£ when they cot nomo. At lost h«> paw lTd, nnd spying the child's shoe be "shied" it at his -wife, but it tr.ts*ed ber and struck tbo child on the forehaad. lie was eorrv ho liad done it. He said that if his Worship had bad the rxperienrr lio had had his Worship wight understand his feelings when he "shied" the shoo. Sub-Inspoclor Mullaney said accused's wifo was statod to be a. particularly hard-work-ing woman, tt!*> was trying to keep tlio homo coins. Accused should bo prohibited. The ilafris'.ratc eaid this would «fleet his eaplovmont. Subjnspector Muilaney: I think tho whoio trouble was caufed through drink. The Masistraio said Uk> root cause of tl» tronblo was this: Tbo man was under the icfluonco of liq>ior that night. There *» Do doubt about thst. Ho (his Worship) did not know anything about the wifo, whether | she wae a nag or not. No matter what the man's excuse was he should givo up aloohol. Ho (hi* Worehip) in the meantime would not issua ft prohibition order against him because that would throw him out oi employment. Ho would be convicted and ordered to come up for sentenco when called upon, with this warning that if ho Rot drunk offain ho would be sent to gaol, H:o "Worship added that if events piwed thai the man could not resist the drir.k he would have <1 prohibition order issued against hrm. PROCURING- LIQUOR. Thomas Nolan was convicted of enterinz licensed premises while prohibited," and COrtvie tod and fined Xt, with costs, in default 14 days' imprisonment, for procuring liquor while prohibited. James charged with procuring linior whilo prohibited, was convicted and fined £2, in default seven days' imprisonment. DISMISSED. Charges against Jatrvas Cullcn, of procuring liquor while prohibited, and of entering licensed promises while prohibited, wero dismissed. INDUSTRIAL BREACH. G. A. Howell was fined £2, with ooats, for failing to keep a proper wuros and timo book, and mukicd in a similar amount for failing to koep a propor holiday boo"k. DEFECTIVE WEIGHING MACHINE. Ernest John Longdin *» charged with bavins in his possession a weighing machine which wan fal«. Mr H. Ed#w, who appeared for defendant, said the machine was a penny-in-the-slot one, which had apparently been tampered with and gone wrong. Tbcro bad been no intent to defraud on dtfendant's part. Tho Act ' stipulated that sucli machines must bo confiscated, and Mr Edgar accordingly asked that this should bo the only penalty infEoted* Defendant was convicted and fined 3s, and an order wba made lor tho confiscation of the machine. MAINTENANCE. Ivanhoo Price, charged with disobedience < of » maintenance order, sentenced to three months' imprisonment, no wararnt to be issued provided lCs per week were paid, bciutr Is weekly off arrears, and 15b current maintenance. I William Ritchie was ordered to pay 103 por week for the •maintenance of an inmate of a home. Ernost John Braid was ordered to pay Eva Braid 30s a week maintenance. A clvargs against Frank Hallifjan of disobedience of an order was dismissed. ( AFTER HOURS. William Ernest Lawrenco, chnrgod with • being found on licenced premises during closed hours, was fined 3ta, and ordered to < pay costs. . RESERVED JUDGMENT. , In the case of Richard J. Carey (itr A. 1 J. MaJley) v. John T. Docherty (Mr C. S. Thomas)/ claim JC7S damopes in respect of an ; acid on t on tbe Yaldnurst road on May ( Jsth last, tbe Magistrate gayo his reserved judgment in favour of plaintiff for £!J5 3s.