OWNER FINED FOR NEGLECT OF DOG

Press, Volume XCII, Issue 27705, 8 July 1955, Page 16

OWNER FINED FOR NEGLECT OF DOG

MAGISTRATES COURT

a man who tied up a dog and neglected it for seven days was convicted and fined £3 by Mr Rex C. Abernethy. S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court yesterday. He was Arthur Alexander Gilmore. a water-race cleaner, of Coalgate. who pleaded guilty to a charge that between May 20 and May 26 he failed to sunrly his dog with sufficient food and water.

Sub-Inspector F. J. Brady. who prosecuted for the police, said that Gilmore was employed by the Malvern County Council- On May 20 Gilmore left his home in Coalgate and went to Christchurch Before leaving he tied his dog to its kennel—an o’d tank at the back of his vard. He did not return until seven davs later. In the meantime Constable Potts, of Coalgate, saw bread and milk piling up at the front gate of Gilmore’s home and. thinking that something might be amiss, made an investigation. He found the dog “mad with hunger and thirst” and he fed and watered it. When accused returned he told Constable Potts he had been confined to bed in Christchurch and had intended to go to his home on May 22.

Accused, in a statement from the dock, said he had left out two rabbits and water for the dog. which should have been sufficient to keep it going until* May 22. There was no telephone it the house where he was ill. He had no money to send a telegram and could not borrow any. “If I fine you heavily your children •will suffer but had you not been ill I would have inflicted a very heavy fine, indeed.” said the Magistrate. “You cannot persuade me you could not have done something. Do not leave an animal alone like that in the future.” LICENCE SUSPENDED Allan John Henderson, aged 30. a caterer, of Hornby (Mr R. A. Young), was convicted and fined £5 and costs when he appeared for sentence on a charge that on June 18. being the driver of a motor-vehicle, he failed to stop after an accident. His driver’s licence was suspended until June 30, 1956, and he was disqualified from obtaining another until cleared by a medical certificate and with the approval, after application, of the Court On a charge of failing to ascertain whether any person had been injured in the accident Henderson was convicted and fined £5. Mr Young said that accused had thought that the accident in which he had been involved was only a minor one. The car in the accident had also driven on. Accused would go to hospital for a remedial operation as soon as a bed was available. “I have already dismissed charges of drunken driving and driving without due care and attention,” said the Magistrate addressing accused. “You knew you had had this accident. You had this grave injury some years ago. I was assured by one of the senior surgeons in Christchurch in evidence that the injury might bring about trouble any time unless a further operation took place. Until you are cleared by the medical authorities it is not safe for you to drive and it is my duty to keep you off the road.” REMANDED Electing trial by jury, Ronald Stuart Alexander, aged 30. a car salesman <Mr B. McClelland), was remanded to July 13 on a charge of failing to account for money and for a breach of probation. He was charged that on May 23. having received £285 in money from Emma Honora McLaughlin, on terms requiring him to pay the money to George Howison Jones, he fraudulently omitted to pay £lO5 to Jones, thereby committing theft. Bail was renewed.

John Luke, aged 35. a labourer (Mr M. G. L. Loughnan’. was remanded to July 14 on a charge that on June 28 at Christchurch, with intent to defraud. he obtained from A. C. Robi’liard a wrist watch and £9 10s in

money, by falsely representing "that a cheque for £2O was a good and valid order. He was allowed bail in his own recognisance of £5O. with one surety of £lOO. and is to report daily to the police. LICENSING BREACHES Leonard Kendall O’Neill, licensee of the Leeston Hotel, was convicted and fined £3 on a charge that on May 21 he sold liquor after hours. Stanley Frederick Stenhens was convicted and fine £7 on a charge that, being a person other than the licensee, he supplied liquor after hours. Mr L. J. Steel aopeared for both defendants. Sub-Inspector F. J. Brady said that at 9.15 p.m. the police made a surprise visit to the Leeston Hotel. In th-? bar the party found five men and five emptv beer glasses were on the bar. Stephens was on duty behind the bar. It appeared that O’Neill had left the hotel about 7 p.m. to go to Christchurch. leaving Stephens to clean up in the bar. O’Neill was. however, vicariously responsible for the offence. Mr Steel said it was a case of vicarious responsibility. When O’Neill left the hotel he locked up and told Stenhens he was not to suppy anyone with liquor ‘‘lf a licensee has a barman who will nnt obey him. he knows what to do with the barman.” said the Magistrate when imposing the fines. Five men found on the premises of the Leeston Hotel after hours were each fined £l. They were William Charles Drury. Raymond Alfred Wasley, Selwyn Lockie. Alexander Lennie, and Mervyn Thain. Kelvin Dillon Overend and Ronald Charles Barlow, who did not appear, were charred that on May 14. being persons under the age of 21. they were found on licensed premises at the Clarendon Hotel. Each was convicted and fined £2. Sergeant C. F. Smith gave evidence for the police. CHARGES DISMISSED Charges against David John Sinclair and Donald William Otty McNair of fighting in Colombo street on January 27 were dismissed for want of prosecution. Sub-Inspector F. J. Brady said he would not offer any evidence on the two charges. McNair was now serving a prison sentence at the Mount Eden Prison, and it was not worth while getting him down to Christchurch to answer a simple fighting charge. Sinclair was going to defend the charge, and his solicitor wanted McNair in Christchurch for cross-ex-amination. he said. ATTEMPT TO BOARD TRAIN Ronald Sydney Brant, of Frankton Junction, was fined £4 for attempting to board a moving train on May 2. CONVICTED OF ASSAULT David James Bruce Heaney, aged 29, a labourer (Mr R. S. D. Twyneham), pleaded not guilty to a charge of assaulting Rangi Lavaum Dowler, and also to a charge of wilfully damaging a pair of spectacles and a pair of stockings, valued at £9 4s, the property of Mrs Dowler. He was convicted on each charge and remanded in custody for sentence on July 14. The Magistrate asked for a report from the Probation Officer. In evidence. Dowler, a married woman, said that at about 11.15 p.m. nn the night of June 24. she had been I followed for some distance on foot along Manchester street. Accused had accosted her. He said he had been drinking at a hotel and lived in Strickland street. Witness told him that she was going- into a nearby house which, she said was her home, in the hope that accused would go away. She turned to go into the house, but was tackled and thrown ~n to the road. She was struck on ile nose with a closed fist. The blow smashed her spectables and the bridge of her nose was gashed. Accused ran away, and later, in the presence of witnesses, she identified accused as the man who had assaulted her. but accused had denied ever having seen her before.

Constable R. L. Stapley said that when the accused first saw witness in Bath street he ran away. When caught, accused said he had run because he thought the police were after him for drinking on the premises of the Excelsior Hotel after hours. He said he was on his way home to Strickland street. Robert Curragh, licensee of the Excelsior Hotel, said that accused had come to him on June 26 and requested that he should say that he had been ■witness’s guest at the hotel on the night of June 24. Witness refused. He had never seen accused in his life before and accused had not been in the hotel on the night of the assault. ‘‘The police have got the wrong man. This is not the man,” said Mr Twyneham. The only evidence of identification had been given by "a woman “who was obviously distressed.” In evidence on his own behalf, accused said he had been drinking at the Excelsior Hotel on June 24 with another man and had left at 11.15 p.m. He denied any knowledge of the assault. THEFT FROM HOTEL An 18-year-old housemaid, whose name was ordered not to be published meantime, pleaded guilty to two charges of stealing money and jewellery from a guest and staff members of a hotel The case was adjourned to July 14 for accused to be sentenced. The Magistrate asked for a report from the Probation Officer. Detective-Sergeant G. C. Urquhart prosecuted for the police. Accused was represented by Mr B. McClelland. OBSCENE EXPOSURE A Dunedin man whose name was ordered not to be published meantime pleaded guilty to a charge of obscene exposure in New Brighton road. He was remanded to July 14 for sentence and for a report from the Probation Officer.

Detective-Sergeant G. C. Urquhart appeared for the police. Accused was represented by Mr B. McClelland.

(Before Mr L. N. Ritchie, S.M.) ADMITTED TO PROBATION Robert Harold Joseph Wheeler, aged 41, a driver (Mr B. J. Drake), was admitted to probation for two years when he appeared for sentence on a charge of receiving two shotguns and a sheath knife, of 3 total value of £7O 12s 6d, the property of Kenneth Charles Pegley, knowing that they had been dishonestly obtained. Mr Drake said the accused had had a most unfortunate life. He had trouble with his legs and it was found necessary to amputate them. He had also lost two fingers and a considerable portion of one hand. In spite of these disabilities he had carried on throughout the years in a most unhappy position. This was the first time he came before the Court for an offence involving dishonety since 1942. The Magistrate said the accused had three previous convictions for dishonesty. He did not believe accused’s story. He would take into account that it had been 13 years since he had been involved in dishonesty, he said. CIVIL CASES (Before Mr L. N. Ritchie. S.M.) POSSESSION ORDER George Laurence Fox, and Noeline Mary Fox, a married woman, claimed possession of a house at 39 Grafton street from Margaret Eileen Smither, a spinster. An order for possession was made by the Magistrate, who ordered that the warrant should lie in the Court for three months. Mr A. C. Perry appeared for plaintiffs. Mr R. C. Thornton, of the Labour Department, represented defend-, ant. Mr Perry said the plaintiffs’ case was one of hardship. They and their two children were living with Mrs Fox’s parents. The four of them occupied one bedroom measuring 11 feet by 10 feet. There were seven other adults living in the same house. Plaintiffs had purchased Miss Smither’s house from the Public Trustee, who was managing the affairs of the late

Mr and Mrs Smither (Miss Smither’s parents), who had formerly occupied it. They proposed to take one bedroom for themselves, one for their children, and a living room. They would give Miss Smither, who worked out all day, a bed-sitting room and the use of conveniences. Since plaintiffs had given notice of their purchase of the property in March waste had been committed, said Mr Perry.

Mr Thornton said he realised an order for possession would have to be made eventually, and the matter would only be a question of time. “Would it not be better to come to some suitable arrangement rather than to have unhappy feelings?” asked the Magistrate. After counsel and the parties had conferred, the plaintiff agreed, at the suggestion of the Magistrate, that an order for possession should be given and that the warrant should be suspended for three months. A condition of the suspension was that the tenant allow plaintiffs to look over the house and that nothing further be done by her to the property. Heather Bell Carl, a married woman, claimed possession of premises at 90 Linwood avenue from Ngaire Beth Jacobson, a married woman. Possession was ordered forthwith, the warrant to be in Court for two months. Mr W. K. L. Dougall appeared for plaintiff, and Mr R. C. Thornton for defendant. JUDGMENT FOR PLAINTIFF Archibald Alexander Torrance and Dennis Charles Healey, builders (Mr S. R. Dacre) claimed £212 19s lid from George James Porteous, a machinist, and Lucy Porteous, his wife (Mr A. D. Holland). Judgment was given for the amount claimed for work done for defendants at 433 Ferry load and for material supplied between October 5. 1954, and October 29. 1954. Torrance in evidence said that he had received full instructions for a job from Porteous. An account had been rendered to “G. and L. Porteous,” but it had not been paid. When wit-

ness saw Porteous about the matter, Porteous asked for a detailed account. This was sent out, but was not paid. The name in which the account had been sent had been taken from a notice on the door of Porteous’s office. At no time had he accepted liability on behalf of Porteous’s company. He did not know there had been a company, had not been concerned with one. and had not sent an account to one.

“We were not dealing with a company—we were dealing with one man.” said witness in answer to a question by the Magistrate. “This is a debt properly due by a companv that had been operating under the name of Porteous Weighing Machines, Ltd.,” said Mr Holland. “On the evidence of the plantiffs it is clear that in dealing with Porteous they were dealing with him as an agent and not him personally. It is unfortunate, and defendant will agree, that, vzhen ordering the work, he did not specifically state that it was done for the company, so that the legal position is that the plantiffs were dealing with an agent for an unnamed principal. The company went into ’voluntary liquidation at a meeting of creditors. Plaintiffs were present at the meeting after being duly notified. By this action they are endeavouring to be paid in full, whereas other creditors will only be paid a portion.” DAMAGES CLAIM Thomas Read, an antique dealer claimed £3 damages from W. Dempsey, a labourer. Judgment for plaintiff was given in the sum of £l. Read, in his statement of claim, said that from April 23 to April 29, a pony owned by defendant entered and remained on a property owned by him in Allen street without consent or authority, and that on April 29 defendant entered the property without permission and damaged and removed part of a fence. Mr J. G. Leggat represented plaintiff. Defendant conducted his own case.