MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Greymouth Evening Star, 16 October 1939, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

TRAFFIC CHARGES DISMISSED. In the Magistrate’s Court at Greymouth to-day, before Mr G. G. Chisholm, S.M., William Michael James Maloney was charged, on the information of Transport Department Inspector D. I). Burdett, with (1) exceeding the load for which his motor-lorry was licensed and (2) having no xehicle authority. Defendant, for whom Mr. W. Douglas Taylor appeared, pleaded not guilty to botli charges. Inspector Burdett said that at 4 p.m. on September !>, at Kamaka, lie saw defendant’s lorry loaded with mining timber, and weighed it. The weight] was six tons seven cwt. Defendant | was the holder of an F heavy traffic license, under which the maximum load was five tons, thus the overload was one ton seven cwt. Defendant, who was a. licensed operator, was carrying the timber to the mine at Blackball, and was unable to produce a vehicle authority enabling him to do the work. To Mr. Taylor: Witness would agree that, if it was his own timber, there was no need for him to have a vehicle authority. When witness arrived defendant had just finished loading, at the side of the road, and witness left before he (defendant) started. He was about to leave the side of the road when witness intimated that he wished to weigh the lorry. Witness did not tell him to take any of the load off, but handed him a. ticket showing the amount of overload. Witness denied that he had been told by Mr. Wilson, following a conference at Greymouth, that an overload of half a. ton would not be made the subject of a prosecution. He knew that there had been, a discussion on the matter, but he thought that it concerned, sawn timber. Defendant, in evidence, said that the timber was his own property, he purchasing it on his own behalf and supplying it to the.Paparoa Coal Company. He had not completed loading the lorry when the Inspector came along and weighed it. The load was not tied down, and after the Inspector went away he took some of it off. The Inspector had not told him the extent of the overload, but had handed him a ticket. To the Inspector: He had taken some of the load off after the weighing, because his rope was not long enough to go round it. It was impossible tor anyone to tell the weight of mining props, because they varied. To the S.M.: The truck was standing on the right-hand side of the road off the traffic line, when the Inspector came along, and was moved only when the Inspector asked him to come out on the road to be weighed. The S.M. said that, in the circurastanstances, he was not prepared to convict on the charge of overloading as, technically, defendant had not actually carried it on the road, except when he pulled out to be weighed. Defendant was fortunate that, the Inspector came along when he did, as if he had been caught when once he had started, he would have to have been convicted. He (the S.M.) hoped that defendant would take it as. a warning. He thought that, with a little co-opera-tion between the operators and the Inspector, the weighing machine could be used, not only as a means for prosecutions, but, at the request of carriers, to give them an indication of their loads. In regard to the other information, he (the S.M.) was satisfied that the timber was the property of defendant, and that charge would also be dismissed.