MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 29, 29 October 1907, Page 9

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

...... J • ■ : y ■■■ ■ •'■■ ■ •; : " (Before Mn Riddelli'S.JL) '","■ " : :■[,, POLICE CASES./; ' '•..Three' finst-pffending inebriates made their appearance at the Magistrate's Court-yester-day morning. One was convicted and fined 55., in' dofault 24 hours' imprisonment, and the other two were, convicted and discharged. An elderly• woman, Ellen.'W.ood,''cameforward on a ; charge vpf having -a grossly indecent' act ; in 'Victoria • Street -on Saturday ovenirig. Accused, pleaded guilty, and askod for another chance: His Worship • stated that defendant mustibe' penalised. She would- be' convicted 'and fined'F£3/;in dei fault seven .days' iimprisonment. ■:'.'; .'.'.;':'■ '■■

A POUND-EEEPBR'S.CHABGES: : ... ; ' Kbenezerv Round,, .pound-keeper -at Kaiwarra,■;appeared, on:a charge of having unlawfully demanded from John George Wilkes botcher, Porirua,, the sum- of ss, for. time lost in. attending a sale in respect of -i horse..,received'into the Kaiwarra -.'Pound.' Wilkes , was the'owner of a poriy impoundetl by Round, , which animal was sold as iit was BOt claimed by its owner, tho .proceeds being insufficient io paythe poundikeepprs , charges. It was contended for the defence ;that.Round /being . paid by. fees -and not.;. by a , regula.salary, entitled to charge for Kis tinn in attending any sale of "cattle impounded. If the Court found that, theidomand shoulu not have been made, jiounsbl woiild'■'prWe that iit was, mado innocently.!,. . Defendani Bound" stated , that it'was,.tho general practice Of pound-keepers 1 for'/timolost attending, sales. The contentidn"for the prosecution was .that a pound-keeper could not charge; for anything unless, authority wa> given for the charge, in the schedulo of.thn impounding Act 1884. The charge in. this case, it was argued, was not so authorised. His Worship, stated that;the Actiwas not quite-clear on the point, Vand he'would re-1 Eervohis decision to look into , the .question Mr., Smith appeared for tHe.prosecution, an 1 Mr. P. Jackson for the, defence. ;. ; ' "."

-._,,. v; MAINTENANCE CASE. •• George .Stanley, defended by' Mr. Jacksun, was ordered .to contribute. 7s. .per week te : wards; the, support of, his. illegitimate child Defendant was also ordered,, to pay., birtii expenses, £5 ■&.,-[and,costs,-,.£2 J .25. J ;..".'' ! ; ■ -POLLIJTING A TROTJT STREAM. ,<■■■ Joseph Dryden, sawmiller, was 'charged. on the information of Reginald J.. Downing, inspector for the Acclimatisation Society, with, on September 14, .unlawfully placed sawdust near the bank of, the Akatarawa stream:;; : «;-.-' .':.-■ - ; •''■'."'.:! ' V;-.'V : '-:'-"r: .Defendant,, who was defendod; by. Dr. Knight, pleaded.not guilty. Gray appeared; for the Society. .'' Reginald J. Downing, ranger for the Acclimatisation Society stated , that ; the Akatarawa stream was one of the best trout streams in the Hutt district. Defendant's mil].was situated on'the',upper reaches of the 'stream/ sawdust was l taken from under the.saw,by a stream. \bi water and deposit-ed l on the river bank. There was a wbodon barricade to kpep tho sawdust out': of , • the river. This barricade was not sufficient-to .prevent/.sawdust \froni getting' into the Btreani. : ' There were"'Several" water channels through the sawdust heap'into the river I' Complainant considered.the sawdust could be stored'in another place at a , little greater cost. 'Witness spoke to Dryden several times, buMittle improvement was effected. • ■ Joseph Dryden stated thai three barricades had been erected;:and the outside one 'was 25ft. froin the riverbank in the,middle,and Bft. -. ; at. the 'ends. The first barricade was broken,- but a second, and 'subsequently a third,"had been erected. "' The day • previous to ithq ranger's vis'it; the . third barricade broke and allowed some dust to get into thefiver. There wasno other'place to store the sawdust. He,had done his utmost to keep the dust out of'the stream. , .;..' '

•A partner with defendant said he had seen sawdust in the river ' after a flood or a largo quantity of, storm water had come.down from the hills. : The, mill employed fifteen hands' and: if they. were prevented from depositing the sawdust where it now! was. the mill would have to close down. .'-. ■ Dr. KnigM, submitted:that defendant had, done , :all in.his power to keep the-sawdust out of the river.•;.-, .' ~, .:.'.,: ■:■:, .•■..-'.,.' His Worship, in giving Ms decision, stated that at the time defendant erected the mill he was aware that the position ho had selected: was a difficult one,' as far as getting rid of the dust was concerned, i'Defendant had done something to keep the dust from the stream, buV the .question was whether he ; had 4 done sufficient. On the whole, tho Court did not think defendant had taken all . . PF eca utions' he.could, have taken. ' : ' ; Tho position/was a .hard one!., Mendant would ho penalised ;in-the minimum amount dOs.,. with 'costs 28s. :,.. • v ."■ '.■'■..■■',

..'v .CHARGE OF CRUELTY DISMISSED. ■The Society for,the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals - proceeded- against Demewi Meanoleey, an ex-fisherman, for having used'and driven a lame- horse on October 18. Mr. Noave-appeared for the'prosecution • and Mr.'Wilford defended; :- .r, '■'■■ : .

Alfred Williams, inspector for tho' prosecuting Society, stated that[subsequent to the present charge he had spoken to the driver of the horse and told him that the animal" was not in' a fit:state to■ bo worked; ■ ■ ' Constable Aitken deposed that he had e'x-amined-the horse, which was lame, and, in his opinion, unfit for work; -' ! ■'■■■-, t Mr. Wilford, for the defence; admitted that the horse was lame, but 'contended that intention of cruelty must be proved. Igiiorancb was hot: an intention to commit cruelty. Dpfendanf had turned'the horse out from the first day the inspector saw it until the date the information was laid. The animal then seemed to bo well, and defendant put it into tho cart and drovo slowly into town. :...••"' W.. C. 'Quinnoll, voterinary surgeon, who examined tho. horse, stated that the animal was_ not-fit for work. It was suffering from e chronic disease, nngbono, and he supplied defendant with medieino for the horso Witness did not think defendant know the horso was lame. It was possible for a horse suffering from ringbone to start out quite fresh and after travelling-some distance on a hard road develop signs of lameness. ■His Worship stated ' that there was no doubt, from the evidence of.'the inspectoFand the constable, that the horse was lame. At the same timo, unless defendant was awaro that the horse was suffering from tho disease when ho started, it was impossible to say he was intentionally, guilty of the offence. Under the circumstances, the.information must bo dismissed. . .. .. . .