MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Press, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 25364, 11 December 1947, Page 4

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

WEDNESDAY(Before Mr F. F. Reid, S.M.) REFUSED MILK SAMPLE How a dairyman had refused to supply a milk sample, and had used insufbng words to the inspector, was related oy Mr A. W. Brown, who appeared for the Health Department, when a charge of refusing to comply with the demands of Richard George Thomson, an officer appointed under the Food and. Drugs Aet, was heard. The defendant was Albert Edward Lovett. Two alternative charges were withdrawn, and the Magistrate fined Lovett £3.

Refusal to supply an inspector with a sample was a very rare occurrence, said Mr Brown. Most vendors were co-oper-ative. Mr Thomson, an inspector of the Health Department, had asked accused for a sample of milk. Lovett had refused and then used insulting language to the inspector.

An offer to let the inspector take an unofficial sample had not been accepted. The matter was regarded gravely by the department, but he was happy to say that such conduct was quite foreign to the usual habits of milk vendors in Christchurch, said Mr Brown.

Mr R. P. Thompson, who represented Lovett, said his client was a hot-headed man who had been labouring under an alleged grievance. As he had gone out of the milk business, there was little likelihood of a repetition of the incident. “If defendant had still been in the business, I would impose a substantial penalty. This is the first case of its kind I can remember in my years at Christchurch,” said the Magistrate, imposing the fine. The department, he added, had a difficult enqugh job .without being obstructed in such a manner. THREE CHARGES AGAINST FIRM Charges of selling a suit-at £l6 16s, the price being in excess of that authorised, of failing to keep proper costing records, and of charging £8 15s to make up a double-breasted suit, the price not being in conformity with the approval of the Price Tribunal, were brought against Sewell,Bros., Ltd., tailors, qf Cashel street (Mr C. S. Thomas). Pleas of guilty were entered to two of the charges, but the allegation of failing to keep proper records was denied.

For the Price Tribunal, Mr J. D. HutchisOn said that the firm had bought a number of suit lengths from a travelling salesman named Watson, and it was considered that the records of these transactions were not sufficient. There was no way in which inspectors could identify material in any particular suit. Purchases from travelling salesmen could not be checked, and there was no way of seeing that the price paid for such materials was a ; fair one.

While the regulations demanded proper records, there was nothing to compel tailors to keep samples pf the materials used in all the suits they made, said Mr Thomas. His client claimed that the prices set out in the firm’s books were the correct prices paid for materials, he added. Harry Francis Sewell said he had paid whatever prices were asked by the travelling salesman. He admitted that slips might have been made in the records, as he was a tailor, not an accountant.

He was satisfied that the company was doing its best to comply with the regulations; but there had been a breach, and Sewell had admitted that there had been mistakes, said the Magistrate. He imposed a fine of £3 for selling the suit at the excessive price, a fine of 30s for charging £8 15s to make up a suit, and ordered the payment of costs on the charge of failing to keep proper records. EXCESSIVE CHARGES FOR SUITS

Since the charges were laid application had been made to the tribunal, and authority to charge £7 12s 6d fqr making up suits had been granted, said Mr J. B. Corbett, appearing for Walter Day, Ltd., tailors, who faced three charges. The informations laid against the firm were for charging £l5 to make two suits and £7 10s for another the prices not being in conformity with the approval of the Price Tribunal, and of failing to keep proper records of orders.

Mr Hutchison, who represented the tribunal, said that the defendant firm had made up a three-piece double-breasted suit at a cost of £7 10s, when the authorised charge by the company was £6 12s 6d. Another customer had been charged £l5 for two suits, the material for which he supplied The defendant company had practically no records except receipt books Mr Corbett said that as the firm was handling only small quantities of material the matters must have been overlooked. The company was convicted and ordered to pay costs on each charge. SALESMAN FINED Cyril Anthony Watson a travelling salesman (Mr J. B. Corbett), was fined 20s on charges of selling suit lengths to Sewell Bros., Ltd., while a notice prohibiting the sale of such goods was in force, and of failing to keep proper costing records of the sales. He pleaded guilty. For the Price Tribunal Mr Hutchison said that accused was an itinerant salesman who had sold a number of suit lengths to Sewell Bros., Ltd Inspectors had been unable to discover what prices had - been charged in some of the cases. USED. CEMENT WITHOUT PERMIT P. A. Wicks) was fined £3 for using cement without a permit. Mr Wicks said that a man had sold Baker some cement which he said had come from Nelson, where, he told Baker, "cement was not rationed ” NO PERMIT FOR IRON For using galvanised iron without a permit W. K. Tulloch was fined 20s. ORDERED TO PAY COSTS John Vosiliunas was ordered to pay costs for proceeding with the erection of a shed at Pleasant Point without a permit first being obtained. CREAM BELOW STANDARD For selling cream which was not up to the required standard, Cyril Smith (Mr R. P. Thompson), who pleaded guilty, was fined 20s. J. E. Royds was fined £2 and Francis Parker was convicted and discharged on similar charges. UNREGISTERED PLUMBER William John Rodda was ordered to pay costs on a charge of doing sanitary plumbing work while he was not a registered plumber and did not hold a plumlicence. Clement Frank Thomas, who pleaded guilty to a charge of doing sanitary plumbing work when he was not a registered plumber, was fined 20s. Both of these charges were brought by the Christchurch Drainage Board. UNLAWFULLY ON RACECOURSE A fine of £3 was imposed on William Jack Waddell (Mr J. K- Moloney) for being* found unlawfully on the Riccarton

racecourse on December 6 while a race meeting was in progress, he being a prohibited person. He pleaded guilty.