MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 439, 23 February 1909, Page 4

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

' ■'•';; (Before Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M.) -■ ' ,;; : BOOKMAKERS' ADVERTISEMENTS. ■ ,- BREACH OF THE GAMING ACT/ '' Uno Karl Stelinjand Robert Davidson, describing ..■ thomselvc9 as turf. .commission agents/ pleaded riot guilty Mo a /charge:..of. having l caused a certain bookmaker's ad-

vertisemenfc, to be inserted in the newspaper "New Zealand Truth," contrary, to the provisions of the Gamine Aot. 1908;' '•:: . . • Mr. W. H. D. Bell, who appeared for the prosecution, stated that tho case .was similar to tho--recent prosecutions for the pub---lioationof similar advertisements, in wnich cases it had been decided that an offence had ■ been committed within tho meaning of the .Act. , ■■■■.■,'■•■.:.■■•■■•■■■. :"■■';

Mr. Dunn appeared for the defendants. '; Cyril -Boasley; sporting reporter on the , : newspaper "Truth," Jiad seen the advertisement. Ono of the principals of the firm': caino to him and asked about the insertidn of an advertisement of the class in question., Witness -was given instructions to draw it, up in the usual manner, and-to see that there was nothing in it to give. trouble.'Witness, took.the.instructions, and had the advbrtisoment put in. ■;.../' ■ ;..' . > To Mr. Dunn: , Thei wording of'■ the_. adyer-i tisement was left.to -witness, and ho gave one of the partners : to. understand that ho would see that it would go in in the-proper •form.;...■/ ■- , : - ' ■'■'.. •■.;■■■■• ■:■ - : ., .■.•'.; V .'...: ; :

Mr. Dunn submitted that the base should be dismissed. The charge..was against two persons, and it' must,' he . contended,, bo proved that one or other of them did authorise the insertion of the advertisement. As the case stood, the. witness, could only gay that he did not remember which of the two partners instructed him. Counsel urged that, tho _ prosecution must prove that ■■either. Stolin of Davidson gave the instructions. Ho would ask that the caso should be dismissed, without prejudice... , : . : .; , . .:- j-\ ■■ . .His i Worship said/that. he could not agree with Mr. Dunn. The offence was a continuing one, and tho .'proof was'not. necessary,. If' counsel did not propose to call any evidence, a conviction must, be':entered; l \ ■'■;• ' -.-'■ After ..a consultation with his '. clients, Mr. Dunn called '•..■ ,' : .;.:■■ Y.yy'y y '.;-..;/:'■- TJno Karl Stelin,' turf oommission .agent,: who : said, that ho had Been-.the advertisement- in question, but he ; did not-authorise the advertisement to be inserted; -.•'-.''■.•■■ To Mr. Bell: /Witness saw the advertisement' about two ..months, .but took no steps to have it taken out. v -: '•'• ■> ', ■ •■'•'. :,_-..liobort Davidson, turf commission, agent, in partnership with the previous-witness,-re-membered -haying ■ a conversation, with: Cyril: Beasloy arid giving him atrthority! to;put in a couple of inches of .advertisement, but'to bo sure that it was lecial , under the Gaming Aot. .If witness had known that , it was illegal ho \vould not have given instructions to '.put;', it in.: ;■ No money: had been -paid for the;advertisement. ■.;•'-; ■■.'.-:■ - y :.;vv ;;-.' ; .--••■■■■

, ...Tlia'vWorship" .held-, that the -defence-did not, in his opinion; absolve defendants from liability. They would eaoh be convicted and aned£2'los.andtcosts .£l : -c,.■-:.■: ;

-:■■';;■;THEFTTIIOM^\RpdM^MATE:; : V:.:': : ;' WniV'Jas/ alias .-,apv pearert on a: charge-of' theft of a watch a,nd ;at ; £1; the property of Chas. Daniel Harijreavcs. Accused pleaded not:guilty,'and evidence :.was called; to show, that he had been ■ sleeping in the same room as tbo complainant at a lodging-house.- Gcmiplainnnt found that his,.watchand chain , had been taken..out ■ of.;his pocket-during v.the night, an<l, on oalling a policeman,, tho watch; etc.,, was found under i»cciisod's pillow.. : ) Accused, on oathj stated that complainant had lent him the 'watch•,before they retired to -bod, bo that he;could; see. the time when he wolib in .the. 'morning. 1 . Hβ' admitted hav- ; ing several;previous ; convictions against ~his name, .but ..none forUheft.S , " i.y .V:-; , .^ 'i\:--.: .His -Worship .entered ■■: a oonvjiotibn, and.-■ a sentence, of, 14.'daysvimprisonmont.' :"■'*..' V: ;.SCENE qN ; .THE.STE^JOTi:MAO^I. V ' . A J :stronp;-lciblc!ng .mant, named;,;. Thomas Murphy, alias Mooro,. pleaded guilty to the following,: charges: (1) having 'behaved' in 'a disorderly .manner.' whilst .drunk, . on st«amer : :Mabii during-the passagefrpm' Lyt--telton. to ;Wellington ) ;:and : (2) .with .having '.used obscene language. ■' \ '■ ■'■ '.■■';' ■•■ ■'■;; v ■■■'. \ ■, that, accused boarded tjievMaori at Lytteltdn on Saturday ■night,.-being :thenvuhaoivthe : , influpuc,e':of-li3upr;-.^^:Hb\-miertndttbted;.-hiayß;''aHa-:'inVde himself a nuisancb.on.,board "tKe vessel,';and, when the' captain, remonstrated with him, he used'.the,.language: complained; 0!. .AcouseH had,beon-twice convicted in 'Aucjilatnd for us|ng.;pbsceiio: language, v.v:.:'?':;^':;-::::' ■'•;-, 'On.tlie first cnarge.his -JWorsiiip. entered a conviction and fliie of 405.-arid costs lOsij-'-iri default.7' days';,imprißonment.-:;'On the second cl.iarge accused < ,*as convicted 'and sbntehced'to- 2r'days' imprisonment. -,':i ■••:., '.

.'; Edward;.Heriry. Power! -wlio.rfaiied. to,*a'ppear, in '■ answor to ! .a: charge' ofc'disobey'ing ..ah order to: pay; £1 "per .week-■'towards' the maintenance*'.'of- his wife ; ~was . cor>viotedj'.arid i*sente'rteed';.to-'':7.'-daj , .sV.-*:iinpneo , n-' merit, .the '■}. warrant ..to'be^uspended'. if thoamount'.- due were: paid within! 48' hours. ,;.Wm.;> Henry was charged., with 'failing' to,, supoort a certain illegitimate, child; :,Aftor'i'lfcaririg "the ', evidence his .Worship' dismissed tie inform a-' tion,'- without'prejudice, '■; with ,costs, £I:ls,' .Mr.' Dunn appeared for complainant.;," : :: ; :.;.i ■ : yj;:\ ;/,-. vj other vcases, ~y>\. ■ /;-;. ;■ -; v ( ■ '■': An .elderly'man.,named Arthur .Scott-: was; .convicted, and; fined" 2Q;V,. arid costs 95.;.',0n-.a charge inf.^liaviiiiSKenterodlicorißed..premises during the.'currency'of a prohihition : .order." Mr.. p'Regan, • who appeared for defendant,explained' tlia|'. his. client' was" under:'the im■piessipn .that the order had .expired', when ;ho went into the "hotel, but.it was;'subsequently .found : that it'had'still one day'to run. :■,.. v " ■.':■ JoKh Hydo, charged ■ ■syith .insobriety, , ;- was' convicted:-arid fined: , 20s.i : \ui default T- dnye' imprisonment, ; and Miclmol rJaE..Ryah;:,simila.rly .charged,' 7 .was convicted and fined 10s. ; iiudcfault 48 hours'. imnrisqnmerit. ■ V Three 1 first- offenders, 7wlio- did not; : appear, :■ were fined 10s., "and : another, first offender-was con- , .'■.;- =, : '■■■'-...': ''}. .". : - :

APPLICATION; FOR SUMMARY SEPARAi ■'. "-.:..k][ '■;■;,:/■ -TI0N; : ;.-:.;.;,v ,o-.'./ . •' Alice Holland (i'fr. : Dix) sued Henry Ch'as. Holland .(Mr.'Levvey) for 'a summary separation, on :tho .ground of persistent cruelty.' After hearing evidence,:irT.wliicn defendant* .stoutly denied the.allegation of cruelty, his" AVorship said that it was impossible to mako an order on the evidence, .although it: ap-: pearod that Hho.parties .would.; be better .* apart.'.': (Theinformation would be dismissed without.costs; , :':, ■;•'; y. .":;. : ; : :.".- .;...:■■:. ■.;;V-:;;: ; Jir\™LEi; COURT/.:"-,; ; -y: 'the birch; ordered. ' : '. ":. ■•'■.- ; > ■■■; . 'A jureiiile offender, 15.years of age, appeared before' Mr;:. W.: Q: Riddell.■'S.M., ift his private: room:on. a pharge of having, on' February 19,: at ;thoThorndon Baths, stolen three, .the,.'money-, of. one :Pen' ville Moore. -Accused was convicted and.ordered to, receive, six -strokes..of, the birch, to be; administered. by' a constable in'the presence: of a sergeant. The..moiiey, whioh-was recovered, was ordered to-be returned to. the', owner. '" "-..-• '.';: ' / "■:'-..-.. ■.-..■• .'/, ■■...:.-'