MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Greymouth Evening Star, 2 May 1938, Page 2

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

TO-DAY’S GREYMOUTH CASES. Mr Raymond Ferner, S.M., presided over to-day’s sitting oil the Magistrate’s Court at ■ Greymouth. SeniorSergeant E. Quayle represented the police. Eleven statutory first offenders, found on licensed premises after hours, were each fined 5/-, with costs. A second offender, was fined 10/-, with costs. \ Henry, James Hende, aged 17L insurance agent, of Gladstone, was charged that, on April 30, at Greymouth. he was found in a state of intoxication. while in charge of a motorcar. The Senior-Sergeant said, that Hende was arrested on Saturday evening, and was bailed, out this morning. A young man was in hospital with a broken leg, as the result, of an accident. Witnesses had to be interviewed, and, a remand was therefore applied for, until next Monday. The remand was granted, and bail was renewed, in £25. Lloyd Cecil Williams, who appeared on remand, was charged that, on April 23. at Cobden, he unlawfully and without colour of right, but. not so as to be guilty of theft, converted to his own use a motor-car. valued, at £l2O. the property of Len Egerton. He was also charged with driving without, a license. Mr C. R. McGinley, who appeared for accused, applied for an adjournment for a. week. The application was granted, and hail in £lO was renewed. BREACH OF LICENSE. Appearing on remand. Herbert Helm, alias Eric Curnow, 50, a native of Tasmania, described as a cook, was charged that, on April 23, at Greymouth, being a person released on probationary license under the. Crimes Amendment, Act, .1910, he failed to comply with the terms of his license. Accused pleaded guilty. Detective Davis said that, accused had a. list of convictions, and had been declared an habitual criminal. He was released, on license on February 8. 1937. one condition being that lie should report to the Probation Officer. He reported at Auckland up io October 15. 1937, and then disappeared. He was arrested at. Greymouth on April 23. Accused said that ho got. drunk in Wellington and lost his license, therefore did not report. Jin arrived at Greymouth with another convicted, person, from Auckland, and had been drinking. He had worked, when able to obtain work, and hed kept out of serious trouble. Accused said' that, he did not know that, the man with, whom he. arrived was a convicted person. He himsell bad been loading a straightforward life, and was endeavouring to live down his past. Ho had now been in custody nine days, if he were returned to prison, it. meant, that his license might, be cancelled. Ho asked for a chance to live down his convictions, and. assured the S.M. that ho would be worthy of a chance. The S.M. said that the best, thing he could do was to sentence accused to one month's imprisonment with hard labour. That, would give the Prisons Board an opportunity to review his position.

TRAFFIC OFFENCES. John Owen, charged with driving a motor-car at. Greymonth after sunset on April 11, without a tail-light, and driving without a warrant of fitness, pleaded not guilty. Constable Johnston said that he saw defendant driving along Mackay Street at 8.50 p.m., without a taillight. Constable Murray said that he interviewed defendant on the following day. Owen and witness, examined the tail-light, and found that the; bulb was fused. Defendant admitted 1 . driving the car on the previous evening. He said that McGlashan’s garage had his warrant, of fitness, and that, it had been paid for. The mechanic, howover. said that defendant had not asked him to examine the car. Mrs McGlashan said that the warrant had been paid for. Defendant, said that he paid for the warrant, but Mr McGlashan said that it could not be issued until a defect in the rear axle was remedied. Oil was leaking on to the brake drum. So far as the tail-light was concerned, it was all right on the previous Sunday, and it must have fused on the Monday. Herbert McGlashan said that defendant visited his garage, and made arrangements in the office for a warrant. which he paid for. Oil was leaking on. to the rear brake drum, and the warrant could not be issued until that was remedied. Defendant did not give instructions to have the. fault remedied, but witness believed that, defendant was to bring the car in to have the work. done. The car was taken out. without a warrant of fitness.

The S.M. said it seemed that defendant knew that a warrant could not be issued for the car, andi that he elected to drive it without a warrant. Defendant, said that it was a matter of necessity', to drive the car. It had given trouble since he bought it. and had. been in garag’es about, nine times. Apparently, the oil leak could not be fixed.

On the first, charge, Owen was convicted and ordered to pay costs. On tho second charge, he was fined 15/-. with costs.

Percy Frederick Allan was charged with driving a motor-ear on tho Grey-mcuih-Taylorville Road, on March 21. without a. warrant of fitness. He did not. appear.

The Senior-Sergeant said that the car went off the road. The reason given by defendant was that he dozed off to sleep. He was .injured, and was admitted to hospital. He admitted that ho had no warrant of fitness for the car.

The S.M. imposed a fine of 10/-, with costs.

On tho information of Traffic Inspector R. P. Chibnail, Henry Nelson French was charged: that, oit March 23, at Totara Flat, he drove a car at a speed which, ini view: of all the circumstances, might have been dangerous to the public. Defendant did not appear.

Inspector Chibnail said that, at 3.30 p.m. he saw defendant drive through Ahavra, fairly fast. When he passed the Totara Flat school, the children had just left, and were on the road. Defendant’s speed at the school was 50 miles per hour. He said 1 that' he did not realise he was travelling so fast. The S.M. fined defendant £2, with costs.

Thomas William Scammell and Frederick Tibbles were charged that, at South Beach, on February 26, they used a motor-truck, with insufficient brakes. Defendants did not appear. Inspector Chibnail said that he was

on patrol, on the inain road, and no-1 ticed Scammell driving a light truck.» He was unable to pull up properly, when hailed by a person on the side of the road. Witness tested the brakes on the truck, and neither the handbrake nor the footbrake made the slightest difference to the speed ot the vehicle. The truck belonged to Tibbles, from whom Scammell borrowed it for the day. Tibbles said that he had had a collision with a cow a fortnight previously, and< had not had tHe brakes repaired. They were absolutely, useless. Each defendant was fined'. £l, with costs. . Thomas Neil Mouat was charged that, on'March 1, on Gentle Annie Mount, (1) he failed to carry a vehicle authority license on his. motortruck; (2) failed to carry a. warrant of fitness for the truck; (3) operated the truck without an efficient handbrake. Defendant pleaded not. guilty. Inspector Chibnall said: that defendant's driver could not, produce the vehicle authority or the warrant of fitness. The brake was. not efficient, and the driver said that he had 1 twice asked Mouat to have it fixed. Defendant said that a vehicle authority had been issued to him. to cover the period! to May, 1939. A warrant of' fitness was also in force. A few davs before the laying of the information. one of his drivers left, and took the vehicle authority and the warrant of fitness with him. He had misplaced them at. his home. and was .unable to return them. Defendant had reported the matter regarding the vehicle authority to the Transport Department, Wellington. He. reported the loss of the warrant of fitness to the Public Works man who issued. it. and was told that it was not necessary to issue a, duplicate, in view of "the fact that an application would shortly have to be made for a now warrant. Defendant asked that these informations be dismissed, as trivial, the Inspector being well aware that the vehicle authority and the warrant of fitness had been issued. So far as the charge regarding the brake was concerned, defendant contended that the test, had not. been properly made, and that the conditions laid down in the regulations had not. been observed. The S.M. dismissed the charge regarding the brake, saying that, in view of the provisions of Section 8 of the regulations, the conditions under which the test was applied should be definitely proved. Referring to the oilier charges, be said: that it was in defendant’s favour that he had taken r.tit the necessary certificates. He emphasised, however, that the law required the documents to he carried on the vehicle. In the circumstances, defendant would be convicted’ and ordered to pay costs, on each of the two charges.

CYCLISTS’ RESPONSIBILITY. The responsibility upon, cyclisls to observe the traffic regulations was just as great, as it was upon motorists. remarked the S.M., after hearing the evidence in a case in which William Henry Gaulter was charged that, on March 11. in Bright. Street, Cobden, he rode a. bicycle in a careless manner. Mr C. R. McGinley, for defendant, pleaded guilty. The Senior-Sergeant said that a taxi-driver. Webster, was proceeding along Bright Street, about 25 miles per hour. On coming’ to the intersection of Taylor Street, he slowed down, as he saw a car approaching from the opposite direction. As the taxi reached the intersection, defendant swerved' to his right, immediately in front of the taxi. Webster braked hard, hut was unable to avoid, striking defendant. The latter’s bicycle was damaged. Gaulter said at. the time that he was not injured, but he had to remain off work for 14 days. The case was brought with the object of warning cyclists that, they must ride properly. Mr McGinley said that defendant saw one. car approaching, and' thought that he had ample time to get across the intersection. In doing so. he cut the corner, with the result that he collided with the taxi, which he did not see. Mr McGinley asked that defendant be treated leniently, in view of the fact, that he was injured. The S.M. agreed that defendant had been sufficiently punished, and ordered him to pay costs. Remarking that tho prosecution had' been properly brought, Mr Ferner said that it would servo to emphasise the. fact that cyclists must take great care in riding on the streets. The responsibility was just as great on them as on motorists, and they must obey the traffic regulations in all particulars. This case was an example of what happened when the regulations were not obeyed. The consequences, might have been very serious for defendant. Ho hoped that cyclists would take warning, that the regulations must he observed.