MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Grey River Argus, 30 May 1922, Page 8

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

(Before Mr W. Mcldruni, S.M.) BY-LAWS BREACH. Thomas Phibbs was charged with failing to have a number plate attached to his motor car. The Sen-Sergeant staled the. defendant who belonged tu We& p < . was prosecuted as a consequence of the decision of the police to have the. by-laws observed. Defendaut was lined 5/- and costs SUNDAY PICTURES. MODE I'INEH. Harry McLean was charged with keeping open Mcttrick’s Hull, Blackball. oji the night of Sunday, April 21, for the purpose of show’ing pictures, an action in conflict with the Police Offences Act. He did not appear and was fined £1 ami costs, Patrick Sullivan and Arthur Moore, similarly charged for offences on the same date, were repres-entod by Mr Doogan. Tho first named was charged wdth showing pictures in the Opera House, and the latter at Mandi’s Hall, Blackball. | Mr Doogan stated his clients intendj cd to drop the practice of holding pic- | turcs on Sundays. In view of the fact I that the proprietors had made this dc- ! cision and had kept open merely until • they could definitely ascertain as to | whether they were in the wrong, he I would ask the S.M. to order the pay- ’ meiit of costs only. I The Bench: They carried on after fines had been, inflicted in two cases. It is not looked on by the legislature as a serious offence, the maximum penalty being £l. I The two defendauis were lined £1 and Arthur Behan, proprietor of Peerless Pictures ■was similarly charged in respect of an infringement on tho same date. He did not appear. Sen-Sergeant. McCarthy stated he had told the defendant, if he persisted the ! police would be forced to take drastic 'action already contemplated. The deI fondant said he was taking legal ad- ' vice, and his course of action would depend upon this. I The Benell stated Sunday pictures thud been illegal for a long time, all though the law had not been aided on. ■ ]f sufficient people thought there was j no barm in thorn, then the statute could Ibe altered. Defendant would be lined , and costs.

SHOI’S AND OFFICES ACT. William Southard storekeeper at Hun-| : angn, was charged with failing to close this shop on ’lie afternoon of April SthI last, as recurred by the Simps ami Of- I ! fices Act. i Jlr Joseph Lowden, .Inspector of lae-| lories represented the department and I stated he Lad bad complaints that shops had remained open on the statutory half-holiday. On the day in question he visited the shop. 'J’l'e lights were on, and the shop was open. Mr Southi ward stated as long ns he employed no assistants, lie was not bound by the Act. It. was pointed out to liim that his action was contrary tu the law. The shop contained clothing and otbei articles, as well as ?ruit and eoufeetionery. Mr Southwind had written lately to witness stating lie intended to give up the sale of drapery. The defendant was lined fl ami costs. AFTER HOUKS. j Seven offenders were convicted and j ordered to pay costs. Three of the ! eases were from Waiuta. ■' Two second offenders were fined £1 j and costs.