MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Grey River Argus, 19 February 1935, Page 8

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

YESTERDAY’S CASES. The following cases were dealt with by Mr. Henry Morgan, S.M., at a sitting of the Magistrate’s Court at Greymouth yesterday. Sergeant J. Isbister conducted the police cases. TRAFFIC BREACHES. L. Wilson was fined 5/- with 10/costs for riding a bicycle on the footpath, in McGowan Street, Runanga, on January 14, 1935. Thomas Condon was fined £l, with 10/- costs for driving a motor vehicle on January 11th, 1935, without a drivel ’s license. Jim Rathbun was charged that on February 2nd, 1935, at Greymouth he did drive a motor vehicle on a footpath in Gresson Street, a distance of 30 feet. Defendant was ordered to pay 10/costs. Patrick C. Webb, was charged that, on January 7th, 1935, being the driver of a motor vehicle, he did permit it to remain stationary and unattended in Mackay Street for a longer period at one time, than fifteen minutes between the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. The Magistrate said that this being the first prosecution under the amended by-law, he would not inflict a. fine, hut treat it as a warning to other motorists. Defendant would be convicted and ordered to pay 10/- court costs and £l/1/- solicitors’ fee.

Neil Mouatt pleaded guilty to a charge of operating a heavy motor vehicle, on the Greymouth-Punakaiki highway on January 31, in excess of the 44 tons specified under the Act. Mr. T. F. Brosnan, who represented the Traffic inspector (Mr. H. E. Sloss) said defendant had now arranged with the County Council for a permit, under certain conditions, and under these’circumstances, he did not seek a penalty being inflicted. Defendant was ordered to pay costs 10/- and £l/1/- solicitor’s fee. AFTER HOURS. Twelve statutory first offenders found on licensed premises after hours, were each fined 15/- with costs. Patrick Keating, licensee of the Central Hotel, Greymouth, was charged with aiding and abetting the offence of men found on the premises after hours on January 27th, 1935. Mr. J. W. Hannan, for defendant, pleaded guilty to the charge. Sergeant Isbister stated that at 2

a.m. on the morning of January 27th, he visited the hotel iu company with Constables MacDonald, McGlynn and Robertson. He had previously been informed that a number of men, who had no right to be there, were on the premises. The licensee’s daughter was at the back door, having just arrived home and she sang out “the police are here, Paddy.” She started to go through the back window and he then instructed Constable Robertson to go through the window. He did so and opened the door. As they came in, he saw the licensee pull down the slide in the bar parlour, in which were broken glasses and liquor upon the floor. Keating when asked for an explanation, said that there was no explanation necessary as he and his daughter were the only ones there and were haying a game of cards. There v. as a pack of cards on the table. Witness then went upstairs and located tiiree men in bedrooms. One man had jumped off a shop verandah into Mackay Street. Defendant had a list of previous convictions. A fine of £2 with 10/- costs was inflicted.

Walter Everett Roberts, licensee of the Gilmer Hotel, Greymouth, was charged with opening, exposing and selling liquor after hours, on January 25, 1935. Jessie Roberts, wife of the licensee, was charged with unlawfully supplying liquor after hours on January 25th. Mr. J. W. Hannan, for defendants, pleaded guilty to one of the charges against the licensee, and the exposing and opening charges were withdrawn. A plea of guilty was also entered to the charge against the licensee’s wife.

Sergeant Isbister said that he visited the hotel in company with Constable MacDonald and was admitted by a beard er. There were several men drinking at the bar. The licensee was away in Christchurch at the time. When asked for an excuse, Mrs. Roberts admitted the offence and said, “I am caught.”

Mr Hannan stated that both were first offenders. A fine of £2, with 10/- costs was inflicted in each case.

BUTCHER FINED. William Fisher, of Nelson Creek, butcher, did not appear to answer a charge tnat, being the occupier of premises and using the same as a butcher’s shop, did fail to keep the premises clean and free from foul odours. He was further charged that being the occupier of premises used by him as a butcher’s shop and having received notice from the Medical Officer ot Health, that such premises were not constructed in compliance with the terms of the Health Act, 1920, whereby meat was

exposed to contamination or taint, did fail to have the premises improved and reconstructed within the time specified.

Inspector T. W. Schou, said that on January 4th he inspected the shop and the floor in the small goods shop was covered with grease and dirt, and the walls with blood. There was a most disagreeable odour about the place. Tne place was now in a different condition altogether. The place should not have been used to keep meat in. Defendant had been warned in 1932. \ vast improvement had latterly been made in the place. The son’s excuse was that he considered his father was too taken up with his gold mining interests.

A fine of £2 with costs 12/-, on the first charge and £-1 with costs 12/- on the second charge, was inflicted. COMMITTED MISCHIEF. Lawrence Hughes, of Rewanui, pleaded not guilty to a charge that, on or about January Ist, 1935, he did commit mischief by wilfully damaging a Louse to the value of £l, the property or the New Zealand Government. He was further charged with the theft of two lamps, four brass lamps, and one pair of pliers, of a total value of £l, the property of the New Zealand Government. Defendant was represented by Mr. T. F. Brosnan. Detective H. E. Knight conducted the prosecution. Frederick Edward Cook, employed at the State Coal Mines as chief electrician, said he examined the cottages at the mines on January 11th, and

found three sashes, seven door locks, a kitchen sink, a copper and a few electrical fittings, missing. The house concerned was untenanted for about four months. Mr. James, Superintendent, pointed out similar windows to him, which had been missing and were under accused’s house. Accused would have no right to have the cable lamps found in his possession, and which witness identified as the property of the State Coal Mines. The safety lamps produced were similar to those used by the State Mines. He could not say it’ there were any lamps missing.

Plain Clothes Constable E. J. C. Hay said that when interviewed accused said a pane in his window was brehen on New Year's Eve and he remove! a sash, from an unoccupied house. He did not tell Mr. Cook or the Superintendent at the time or when he returned to work. The cable lamps, a - tsed said he got from an old used cable, and the lamps from a dump near the old top mine. He said he had picked up the pliers after a fire at a house. Accused said that as he was taking the sash from one State house to another, he did not think he was doing any. harm. * Mr. Brosnan contended there was not sufficient evidence and that the charges should be dismissed. The Magistrate, said he was not satisfied the property was proved to be the property of the State. There was too much doubt in connection with the , ownership for him to convict. The onus was on the prosecution to prove the articles were stolen within two years. He could not assume the property was stolen within two years. The charge of theft would be dismissed. On the charge of mischief, evidence was given by Hughes that on New Year’s Eve one of the windows in his house was broken, and he thought he was doing the right thing in removing the window from the unoccupied house. He thought he was justified in further damaging another house to repair his own.

The Magistrate said that the man had no colour of right to go and further damage a house which did not belong to him. To uphold him would be to give others a free hand to do likewise. From a legal point of view there was no justification for the offence and defendant must be convicted. In the circumstances that defendant. had repaired his own house, there would be no penalty. Defendant would be convicted and ordered to come up for sentence if called upon within six months. MAINTENANCE ARREARS. Lewis John Gibbins (Mr. T. F. Brosnan), was charged with the disobedience of a maintenance order, providing for the payment of 12/6 a week. Defendant applied for variation of the order and remission of the arrears, amounting to £B5 to November, 1934. After hearing defendant’s evidence, the Magistrate said that since the order was made defendant had only paid £5/5/-, and this had been under an at tachment order. He was not satisfied defendant had not been able to pay during the period the arrears had accumulated. He should have paid something. On the charge of disobedience of the order defendant would be convicted without penalty. Regarding the application for variation, he-thought defendant should make an endeavour to get employment within the next three months. The arrears would be remitted, excepting £2O, and payment of this amount suspended for three months, the arrears then to be paid off at the rate of 3/- a week. The order would be reduced from 12/6 to 7/- a week for three months. It was, the Magistrate stated, up to defendant to get employment to fulfil his obligations. In the writing off to £2O of the arrears, defendant was being fairly treated.