MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 512, 20 May 1909, Page 9

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before Mr. W..G. Riddel], SIL) 'Mil \ y v ;i:S 'j'Sc NEWSPAPER'ARTICLES " BOOKSELLERS and jianaqer fined. • ; • Another.'movenientv in' connection' .with . the . I '£.^ r^e ®' a °i aln^„^6 nlarul of the' Eewspapcr ■;■ TrntUand several 'bpokselien."' %■ c .B rta lnV.pruited.m'atter :^yi^'a.,cbpy: Zealand Truth? wnicn;Mnt a , n^;pa; |.t 3 :'alleged -to' -be-bf^aa- : ina«-" cent/-linmoral, or .obscene, nature—was-made • yesterday .morninij, when 'tho v;hole of- tho • : ..set down : were Ldisjkised!'6f. '' . ;v •" , Cafi ° ;WaS ' ' - to. take -the information ■ f? I decent,'.- and tho-sale of the ;; ? commentins on tho now , . Dqsition. ,laince-'-the.i'case - was' 'last 'before ' the iUur.t,Aßaidrthat,^,waS;:'diffioult^to/know .-what v t by t;h®. w'ord 'in tlie oharge. Ifo went '■ ■' %: co , nl ! :ne ,s^::'ho;^:dicti°na r y.: 'meaning'of „ ' ? 13 . I| X< l f sbip - had:' read: tho • of,, and he. (oofl'neel): took J®Bdant,. ; it ,inust.■.polnt,; 1 specificallyf.wher'e. ihin'i'weijt on. to-quote prosjoution ; ;in: Christehurch.an' sai^' '' tfon musrfaiP^ Cn ' tta i t '' pro?eou T : , Myers snbmitted ■ that the articks camo : . within the meaning of, the word,. Ho was not ,out words.'; as tho vvacticlea. hadita^be 'at' -as V a ;^hple. the'iiprottle'l^ : ®? id '-thai"^fe'ca^TOS-bct'. liv' 'J?h •> ' ° :■''"ft 1 "' several cases t«^ybiQli;;hi,vd ; 'befen I !?'• Mngifitratea.';.'"':"Ko >-h4d^-also' ■ ' i n ? >' 1 ; : Pf/1 to 'Kin g • : v. 33 wart, qase/.relating.to:the;sale " :: eks nV«T- r if? a ' tain ' I !? ;lin "article.:of,'analoiC . readuig;•;the articles men- £: 'SSS^ ;t ;? 1 '"fPJJßtttion,he -MM- formed. an ; i :Md;.aft'er,hearing. Afr. J' l 9P t ?l ° n «' a s ;stiH the 1 same," matfer did not. require . a ..lengthy decision. , It \s ,'ta purely a question of the' opinion'of the ■A: individual who :^itho;;;articie^Md^eard -SSfiths.': Biria,. and • middi.e-nged , ri .,epple, and'old.pcople.of every:class,/and e'>cry ; d v^^«^?^s:ifUhey'elmse." Iri : . JW-'Wowlups.fopmon.;the.; articles.;were ind»:' - ;n °^ to say on tho s- r*v ; V -°P IniOI V W : .\wrdng-defendant ' 1 -''' Tho ?n>'s.WM on-.de-' i r : n', I ,' lf a ?y' pirtioular : articlo was. actionable. There was no reason -why aheavy penalty should be imposed. 'v.An ordinary j,;•.pcnalty:,wottW. !» sufficient to-rmnke defeiidant Wsj ' b6 CQllvici^l «"cd. Chas. Albert.lanes, similarly charged to the ; to: selling 'the. paper it- . :.6elt,-but not-to the remainder of.the charge . . • Jlr. Myers, who . elected to • proceed • on the ray® word again,; remarked that ; this was . vtiiii'O'" - that ", -this. particnlar*' paiwr .had ;the;•.Court;- : If: b00k- ..! sellers took;the' ; risk'.'of selling-this paper they ■ : know.: the nsk attacling:to their action. : ; i'ossibty they might not know what the paper

oontained, but, if this held good,' a' book--seller might purposely refrain from reading , the !paper, so as to be able.to swear before the Court that ho did not :know-.vhat. was in it. :- Hi's Worship entered a ciinviction and; fine of. 20s.'and..costs (jBI ISs. 6d.). : v. a': : ' ' ■ In the cases of Harold Leonard Cording, Win.Macka'y,. 1 Robort Maokay, 'and A. Hawkins, ' similarly., charged: to tiie abovo, Mr. : AVilford entered ..pleas of .guilty,' and defendants ' were, dnoh lednvioted. and fined . 2Qs., and costs .CI 18s;.ed.: John Thomas M'Kinnon,'manager, of- thepaper, was then charged with' selling copies of it to 0. A. Inucs and 11. W. M'Carthy. Mr. Dunn appeared for:-defendant, tho case .of selling to it'Carthy. being takou first. • Henry -Wnv. Jt'Carthy, bookseller, Ingestro Street, wasoalled .to - prove that-ho. was in the habit of selling the pa'por. ' He. believed that he gave Hio order for tho paper first by letter addrM3ed,.tp.,the. manager, He did not know M'Kinnon-'iii the matter, . Wni; Reid and Gilbert Ryan,. both employed: in the office, wherethe. was/produced, also gave evi-: donce.'-as-a result of which Mr. Dunn sub-', '.mitted -that there. was no case- for,' defendant: to. answer,.as..there was'no'ovidence.before the'. Coiirt that .defendant was the' manager at t(io tin\e the contract was made. -There cbpld havo. been no personal, sale, as M'Carthy did. not' ,know defendant! Further, if M'Carthy brought' an action ..'for.':'.nondelivery of the paper;, he: could' not sue defendant, but would - have to sue tho proprietor. ; . ,-, 1 . . .V <•; Mr."Myers-pointed out that,.if his friend's argument were taken to its logical 'conclusion; he .would.have'to -say that, if a'man-set ..up' a paper, in .New Zealand.'and sold an objectionable production, all lie: would havo to" do would be to. register the'paper in his own name, .and ' f then .leavo ; New.- Zealand •• and. resideelsewhere.-' Defondantr.was the representative.of the regis-, .tered-'proprietor 'of the,paper; and liable in respect ■ of; sales'- made on - the ..proprietor's' bo-' half. .-.He was.liable for every sale. ; ' ;. i■: ■ His Worship considered, there t was -a . case to' ansyer,.'defendantV.boing in. charge' of s the paDor;. ~ Mr., Dunn elected to leave the caso- as. it ;stood..: V ! His : Worship entered a -conviction and . fine of, and costs .£3 12s. Mr. Dunn .gave formal notice of appeal, security being fixed at ino. . -On,-the chargeoorf r selling'a paper to .C. A.Innes, bookseller; defendant was fined 205., and costs. .£3 Us.- -.'Notice of .appeal was also given in -this case, •''i " L TnEFT OF DRAPERY. .A young man nanied- James Connell pleaded guilty-'(1):-to,stealing' two overcoats,'.valued at. 7s. 6a.', the property.: of; Herbert Price j (2) to stealing a shirt, 'valued at: ss.- 'Cel.,; tho property of. -Fanny .-Whitaker; . and (3): stealing a shirt,, 'valued at 4s.- lid., the property of Jas. •Smith and Sons. ' • :-\f.:.H";■ ' ' Accused';.was. remanded, to . Saturday., fdr, sentence, bail being alloivcd in tho sum'of iG2S/ and one surety of :-i£2s.' : Mr.! Pi. W. Jackson "ap-' peared for accused. .■ '■ ".' ': - ALLEGED THEFT OF A HORSE. -.James Patrick '.Hassett - appeared' on a oharge :of having,-,on'May, 4,'•: at, Wellington, stolen' a .horsß,-' valued at JGIO, ..the: property'■ of' Jaa. Brotlierton. '. On. the application of Chief Detective Bro-borg-.a remand.'ito;May,2B was.granted;' aoohsed ' only haying >; arriyed; from; Auckland: on - the' vious night.', .."Bail .was allowed iiri the sum of, 'JC30,.: and . two sureties'.of'-iEIS cacli. OTHER CASES. V Mention.' was^^hiade" the case ? of John Johnston; 'remanded .last week, on a charge of being, an idle : and !disorderly;porson having insufficient Jawful; means of' support... Sub-Inspector Phair, stated; thatyaccused htvu,'beeii charged on -tHe previous Wednesday, when he was remanded for a week for medical observation. - Ho had been ordered to tho hospital by.the.Vaorsiirgeon, 'and. "in-'hospital. too ill to .attend the ' Cpurt;. . Under-the ;.circurastances 'leavo tq with--araw^.'t.h,e;tcasb;'.w,as..'askod. His; Worship-, al:lov,'ed;tlie,cliar(;e tp;;bo. withdrawn;' - . ;Two (irst.oft'eiidovs for drunkonness were ea.oli ■ convicteav.'iihd :fihed ;ss:-, -in . default' 2-t' hours', imprisonment.-■ ' ; . ;.., TICKETS FOR ENGLAND. 'TQURIST -AGENCY SUCCESSFULLY SUED. ; v.-Fiiiality ft'wtis '• reached, in ■ the oiyil . action John Fr WithneU and ,I'ercy Howcroft (Mr. .MJGrath) v. .Thds/ Cook and. Son (Mr.:'ievi),": a' vc!aimsfor;iei7.dainages,;otc., for. failure fondants, to seoiire;:-passages to London by. tho ißuapehu for plivintilfs' wives aftor .."'plairitiffa Jiad ;pald ; :the.', passage ino'ney. r Plaintiffs paid r'.tho; sum •• of >£38: to • defendants'^'clerk, the day. b'efore'.tSefVcssel'.loft, :sold !up .their home, aiid ..h'r.QUghtjtheir/luggage down to!'tW boat: on the 'inbraing of sailing, only to find that'defendants h'ad been Amiable.." to obtain. ■ berths; on the -steamer, whioh , was full. Conseqnentiy. plain-! .-tifEs''wore'!Siyett',their'passage money back. : De- ' fondants *;urged .that they entered into no con* tra:ct;until .they},actually,foundithat tho berths .were, available.. : ! \ Hi3.;'Worship-(!Dr.'-:M|A'rthur)'-hdd; was :olear :.that;'tnere. was'an. undertaking: by defendants to' supply ' plaintiffs :with tickets '.foi ';the:;trippto'-.-Londop,: and 'not', getting ,'the; passage ,plaintiffs; had been put to pertain! exponses.'which».t)»y-i - not; have;had• to, bear af defendants':had >told : tkem.!at once that: 'there. was:' no /..accommodation -' on! the '.steamer.: EvenVoutside'-'of .:tlievcontraot' (Cpurt 'was. inolined: tp; :think ', that ;• pi {thrifts !were! entitlod' !tp;sbmething on the ground of etjuity and good therewas negligence on the part of defendants' clerk. Tho! shortness, of; the,; interval-betwccn! the time'!o'n:.Urliioh./plaintiffs, asked;, for; the';tiokdts "ajid' ;tha{'.bf;tfife;:^Ung ; of.;tHß..:si»&er^Bhoiild!'halve! rendered- tho clerk mora active than' ho. would otherwi.'M i have ; been.!- f Beforo' he : received/the passage-moneyi.heV should/ have rung.Vup the' /at'oainer's; agontal immediately and found out if, ithere Tviis: accopiraddatibn 'ron'. tho vessel; -• Jnilgriientiwduld/be 'for plaintiffs' for V6lO, and tos(3 5,2 Gs.