UPPER HUTT COURT

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 34, 9 August 1934, Page 24

UPPER HUTT COURT

Oast* in tho Upper Hutt Court yesterday wove dealt with by Mr. H. P. Lawry, S.M. „ , _ „ , Thomas Pritchard was fined 5s ior allowing stock to wander. _ ■ For having a vehicle on winch tho^ third party risk insurance was not paid, Robert Campbell was fined £1. ... For exceeding the speed limit, Dominion Distributors, Ltd., were fined £i. G. Cook, Ltd., were fined 10s ior operating, an unlicensed goods service. - For having an overhanging load, o.' anU A. Odlin, Ltd., were fined £1. Edwin John Esler was fined hi ior removing both hands from the handlebars of a motor-cycle. ' On. two charges of overloading on a classified road, MeConnicks, Ltd., were fined £2 and costs on one charge and 10s and costs on the other charge. On a charge of exceeding the licensed load, a fine of £1 was imposed. Frank Goodman was fined us tor riding an unlighted bicycle. • . . For driving at a speed which might have been dangerous to tho public, May Richards was fined £2. William Herbert Willoughby was fined 10s for 'driving an unlighted motorvehicle. For driving at a speed which might havo been dangerous to the public, Tlico. Kelly was fined £5. John Gustavo Swansou was fined £-1 for speeding. On threo charges of exceeding the licensed load wth a heavy motor-vehicle. Evan Brenkley was fine £2, £1, and 10s. He was also fined 10s on each ol three charges of overloading on a classified road, and 10s for operating a vehicle without lamps. Wm. James McGill was fined 10s fw his heavy motor-vehicle exceeding the licensed load, and for exceeding the load allowed by his permit he was fined a similar amount.

On two charges of his heavy motorvehicle exceeding the licensed load. John Morrison ■was fined amounts of £1 and ]os. For overloading on a classified road lie was fined 30s.

the introduced foreign protein. We have an experiment now in progress to test this. Somo fowls are being inoculated with mouse tumour extracts and others with mouse embryo extracts. li' the phenomenon is a non-specific reaction, tho latter fowl should be quite as resistant as those rcer-iving tumour extracts."