MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Greymouth Evening Star, 19 April 1937, Page 2

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

SITTING AT GREYMOUTH. Mr. Raymond Ferner, S.M., presided at to-day’s sitting of the Magistrate s Court at Greymouth. Senior Sergeant E. Quayle represented the police. A first offender, found on licensed premises after hours, was fined 5/-, with 10/-costs. For cycling without a light . m Mawhera Quay, on March 21, William Page was fined 10/-, with 10/- costs. A similar penalty was inflicted on William Parker, for cycling without a light in Tainui Street, on April 13. "James Charles Fraser was charged that, on February 11, 1937, on the Greymouth—Hokitika main highway, near South Beach, he did (1) drive a motor lorry without due care and consideration; (2) recklessly drive a motor lorry.

Mr. T. F. Brosnan, for the defendant, said that, civil cases were pending 1 over the accident out of which the ’ charges arose, and under the circumstances he asked that they should be ■ adjourned sine die. The police offered no objection to i the adjournment, which was granted, ' until after the civil actions. Arising out of an accident in High Street, on April 2, Thomas George Nankivell was charged with negligently driving a motor- car. Defendant : pleaded guilty. The Senior Sergeant said that about 7 p.m. on April 2 a man named Wilson was driving south on High Street, and when opposite the Technical School, lie stopped his car, on the correct side of the road. Almost immediately after, a car driven by defendant collided with the rear of his car. The explanation given by defendant was that he was dazzled by the lights ot an oncoming car and could not see Wilson’s car. There was no reason to doubt his statement that another car was approaching, but that was no reason why he should have driven on when he could not see what was in front of him. The cars were considerably damaged and defendant’s ( father was cut by flying glass. One of Wilson’s girls, who was in the back seat, was slightly injured. . Asked by the S.M. if he had any explanation to make, defendant said that it was only the dazzling lights. He had dipped his lights, expecting the oncoming driver to do the same, but he had not. As soon as the car had passed, Wilson’s car was there and -although he (defendant) applied the brakes, the distance was too short to pull UP- „ . , Defendant was fined £2, with 10/costs. Robert Glen Cameron was charged with the disobedience of a mainten-j ance order made at Greymouth on May 27, 1935, for the payment of 7/6 per week towards the mainteance of his daughter, which was subsequently in creased to 12/6 per week, on July 29, 1935. The arrears to April 5, Wo7, amounted to £lB/2/6. The Senior Sergeant said that defendant had been seen by a constable that day, and had said that he was not coming into court. He had been served with the summons. The S.M.: Not an unusual circumstance in cases of this kind. Constable Rodgers said that defendant had now signed an order for the deduction of 12/6 per week out ot his wages from the Public Works Department, and 25/- had already been paid under the order. ‘ Knowing his [ circumstances, witness did not think he could pay any more. He was a nervous man, and would rather pay it all and go hungry than come into court. The S.M. said that, on the evidence, he did not think he would be entitled to imperil defendant with imprisonment for the arrears. He thought that the best thing he could do would be to convict defendant and sentence him to six weeks’ imprisonment, the warrant to be suspended as long as he pays the amount of the current order (12/6 per week) and leave the question of the arrears outstanding. Judgment would be given in those terms. Christina Passmore was charged, on the information of the Transport Department Traffic Inspector (R. PChibnail), with allowing eight head of cattle to wander on the main highway at Kumara Junction, on Match 1.). Defendatn pleaded not guilty. The Inspector said that he found the cattle, wandering on the road ' and when he interviewed defendant she said that she had opened the pasture gate ane- had gone to get a coat. In the meantime, the cattle were’ wandering down the road to the milking shed. Defendant said that it was not her that the Inspector had interviewed. Her name was Christiana Passmore, not Christina. She had not allowed the cattle to wander.

In reply to th© S.M. defendant said that she did not really own the cattle, they were a family affair.

The S.M. said that the information would be amended, insofar as the Christian name was concerned', and defendant would be lined 10/-, with 10/cosls.

- DEFECTIVE BRAKES.

On the information of the Transport Traffic Inspector (R. P. Chibnail), Alfred ,T. Smith was charged that, on April ?> ,at Omoto, he did operate a motor vehicle not equipped with two brakes, a foot brake and a handbrake, each complying with Reg. «S (2) of the Traffic Regulations, 1936. Defendant pleaded guilty. The inspector said that on the day in question, he was engaged in parking cars near the Omoto racecourse when defendant came along and crashed into one of them. On being questioned defendant admitted that he. had no brakes. The brakes were there, but they were not. effective. Defendant said that although his brakes were not the. best and he had an appointment to get them fixed, they were alright when he left Stillwater. On the way down, however, they got wet and when he applied them they did not act at all. The Magistrate sad that driving a motor vehicle on a highway without, brakes was a serious offence. It was a highly dangerous practice and might involve, defendant in a fine of £5O. or more titan that. It might involve death or serious injury to other persons on the highway. The court could not look lightly on such oilences and defendanl. would be lined £2, with 10/- costs. On the informal ion of the Inspector of Scaffolding ( W. R. J. Montgomery) J. A. Hart. Ltd.. was charged that, on or about March 3.1. they did fail to deliver al. Iltn office of the Inspector of Scaffolding notice of intention to erect a. scaffolding in Devon Street, Greymouth, such scaffolding involving a fall of more, than twelve feet. Mr. -I. W. I lamian appeared for the defendant mid entered a. plea of guilty. Inspector C. 11. Hoskin, who appeared for the Department, said that the Inspector of Scaffolding had

found a two-storey building m the course of erection by defendant, or which no notice had been given. Mr. Hannan said that defendant had four or five jobs in hand and was veiy busy. He had left instructions with the foreman to take out all permits, hut apparently the one in question had been overlooked. It. was the first time defendant had been proceeded against under the Act. In reply to the S.M., the Inspectoi said that there was no question that, the offence was anything hut. an oveiS 1 Defendant was fined £l, with 10/C °On the information of the Transport. Department Traffic Inspector (R P Chibnail), Andrew Hunter was chargedLthat, on March 22, at Punakaiki, he did operate a motor tiuck not equipped with a foot, brake, co plying with Regulation S ot the liai fic Regulations 1936. Defendan pleaded not guilty. , The Inspector said that he had met the lorry owned by the defendant am driven bv an employee, on the Coast road. He had tested the brakes; and had found that there was no slackening of speed on the footbrake bei g annlied. The hand brake was quite efficient. Hunter had stated that he had bad no idea that the footbrake was as 'bad as it was. Defendant said that earlier in the dav a. car had run into the lorry and had torn the brake away. The drivei had driven slowly into Westport am was returning slowly when he, was stopped by the Inspector. He considered that it was quite sale to drive slowly, with the bandbrake in good The Magistrate said that he accepted defendant’s explanation, but the offence of having no footbrake _ had been proved. He would be convicted and ordered to pay 10/- costs.

DAIRYMEN FINED. Baty Bros., Ltd., were charged, on the information of the Inspector of Stock (Mr C. S. Neville) that, on March 15, at Coal Creek, they did use a milking machine and did fail to clean it after use,' contrary to Section 10a of the Dairy Industry Regulations, 1908. A similar charge was laid against Joseph Baty, of Rotomanu. Mr J. W. Hannan appeared for both defendants and entered pleas of guilty. Both informations were taken The Inspector said that. Baty Bros were big dairymen at Coal Creek, just out of town. With an assistant he had had occasion to go there on March 15, and separated some of the Joints of the milking machine, and found them to be in a. filthy condition. The other defendant’s machine was. in the same condition and apparently they ,had not been washed after milking. In both instances the owners were there and saw it themselves. They knew what a serious thing it was with milk to have dirty machines. Mr Hannan said that, in regard to the two different offences, Baty Bros, were at Coal Creek, and Joseph Baty had a farm at Rotomanu. As far as Baty Bros, were concerned, Mr Baty was busy getting in hay . He (Mr Hannan) understood that water had been put through the machine after the previous milking, but apparently it was not hot enough or sufficient disinfectant was not used. Defendant admitted leaving the work to his assistants, owing to his being busy on the hay. The other defendant also cleaned his machine, but apparently some remained in the cups. These were the first, proceedings under the Act. The Magistrate: While I appreciate that these are the first proceedings under the Act since I have been here, nevertheless this class of offence must be looked upon most seiiouslj, involving, as it does, the question ot public health and the infection of milk and milk products, with the possibilities of grave sickness in the community. I trust this will be a. warning to all people operating machines to keep them clean and comply with the regulations. I will take into consideration that this is the first prosecution and each defendant will be fined £2 with 10/- costs. Any subsequent conviction, however, will be treated far more severely.