MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Grey River Argus, 26 November 1935, Page 8

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

YESTERDAY’S SITTING. Offe-nees concerning motor cars occupied the greater part of the sitting of the Magistrate’s Court at Greymouth yesterday, before Mr II Morgan, S.M. One statutory first offender, found on licensed pre raises after hours, was fined £l, with 10s costs. For riding an unlighted cycle after sunset, William Robertson, who did not appear, was fined 7s fid with 10s costs. The Radio Inspector' proceeded against Edward John TTill, for being in possession of an unlicensed wireless sot. The Inspector said that two months’ fees had. been evaded. A license had not been procured, and notices sent defendant had been ignored Defendant was fined £1 with 10s costs. On the information of 'the Apiary Inspector (Mr G. F. Page), John Llewellyn Davies was charged with being in possession of an unregistei ed apiary, at Bla-ckba 1 !. Defendant forwarded ia lettei. pleading guilty. The Inspector said that defendant formerly owned a registered apiary, but it had been unregistered for probably a year. The bees were diseased and were affecting others in the dis trict. He had been ordered to destroy all the bees. Defendant was fined fl. with 10* costs. Louis Zampesp pleaded not guilty to riding an unbghted cycle in Tai nui Street, after sunset. Constable Barr said that he saw defendant and another youth riding an unlighted cycle in Tainui Streel at 10.40 pm. He accosted defendant, who had no excuse to offer then. Defendant defied that he was riding the cycle, saying (that he was coasting on the pedal, lie had told the Constable that h e "did not. need a light, a® lie was walking with the cycle. The Magistrate said that the (sonstab’e was quite definite th° defendant was riding, and he would hnv n to take the offence as proved. A fine of 7s fid, with 10s costs was m flicted. CONVERSION CHARGE FAILS. Appearing- nu remand. Vivian Liar enee Shoahan, 25, was charged (1) tha)t, on November 20 al Greymouth he was intoxicated in charge of a motor car; (2) that he unlawfully converted to his own use. but not so as to be guilty of theft, a motor ear valred at £2BO. .the property of Thor. Bell Howsorr 4 . Mr - T. F. Brosnan, for accused, plea de* not guilty t,o both charge?*, and 4-bjit they be heard separaitely. This was agreed to, the charge of being intox’r.ated In charge of a car being h?ard first. Senior-Sergeant E. Quavle sa : d tn clrcumstancfts of the case were th:V a dance was being held at the Hospital in the Nurses’ on Novem ber 19. The coinplainan. had his cat outside, and on coming nut about 12.30 he found that it war missing. H then s ,o w the accused driving the car into the ho<pi*a' grounds from the direction of town. Howson a eke-' *h' accused wlint he was doing the car, and he said that he had jr*t been down for a enup’e ot ph s. Ho Ro n 'then got into the car am brought the accused into town, and handed him over *o Constahl Hain mond. who waS of the opinion that he was intoxicated and unfit to dm ’he car. Constable Barr was also of ♦he sdme op’nion. and hi' was charged wieh the nff ncos. Dr. Ibiv was called in, and he would give evidence as to accused ’« condition. Thomas Bell Howson gave evidenoon the lines of the Senior-Sergeanl’s statement. He said that the accused had rro authority .whatsoever In take the ear. When he brought the car back the accused was drunk. Witness asked him if he wa« going <o get on l hut he said “No.” and just roiled nvi-r on to ‘he other s’de When the firrr of ‘he ear was op nod in fiunt' of Constable Hammond, the accnsmi fell out. In reply to Mr Brosnan, witness sa’d accused was slightly under the influence of liquor when he eamo in at 11.50, but evidmt’y had had more when he brought the car back TVi: ness had never been in his company before, but knew him by sight. Thn. had been out of the hospital giounds for a drink, and when they came hack, at 11.50, accused had suggest cd that they go down xor n. pie. Wil nos had declined, but said that accused could get one if he wanted it. Coifstable J. W. Hammond s>aid he wa« on duty in Gresson Street, nt 12.30 a-ni., when Howson drove uj , and reported to him that his cur had been taken by the accused. Accused was sitting in the front seat, and appeared sleepy. Witness could tell that he had had drink. Witness asked him wht he took the car, and ho said to get a couple of pies. As accuse.i g »t out of the car, he stumb ed, and •’’as unsteady ’r talking un ;he steps to the police station. He denied that he had had further drink since driving the car. Witness told him that he considered he was intoxicated and not. fit to have been in charge of a car, and he replied that ho had been driving for fourteen years, and it •ras the first time his driving ability had been questioned. Dr. Hay examined the accused at 12.45 a.m.

Constable Barr said ho was presen l in +he Police Station when the ac cused was brought in. Tie noticed that he was unsteady on his feet and his eyes were very glassy. Witness formed the opinion that he was in toxicaited. and not. in a fit condition to drive. although he was r>ot in such a state that he con’d have been arrested for drunkenness. Dr. H. S. Ray said that ho examined the accused at 12.45, and camo 'to the conclusion that he was slightly •nt.-’X’caT» d. Ilis eyes were glazed, his piip’ls were dilated, and his breath smelled of alcohol. He had the. appearance of a man conseinus 1 y controlling himself. lie could stand upright with his two feet together and bis eyes shut, without swaying. He answered all questions satisfactorily,

but occasionally gave the wrong word and corrected himself. He waked quite straight, but turned with a jerk, such us a man would use when he was thinking about his walking action and controlling it. His pulserate was 108. From his tests, he (witness) would conclude, that the accused had had sufficient -alcohol to induce a state of intoxication, which would allow him to perform the mechanical action of driving a car satisfactorily, but would affect his judg ment in an emergency and make him inclined to be reckless. To Mr Brosnan: He was only s’ightly intoxicated, and his physical appearance was sufficient ito show that. It would depend how big they were, and how soon they followed each other as to whether the three drinks at 11.50 would account for his condition. To the Magistrate: If he took the drinks at 11.50 his condition would bo wors e at 12.20 than when I examined him. Mr Brosnan said that he did nut propose to call evidence. The whole poinit was whether the accused was intoxicated when Howson saiw him a few minutes after 12. The accused said he was not. lie (Mr Brosnan) submitted that it was not established that the :»3cusued was so intoxicated after 12 as to bo unfit ito drive the ca r. The Magistrate said that the point was whether he was intoxicated while in charge, not wliei’h'-r he cou'd drive. Many convictions had occurred whore the person, was just, sitting jn the car, and not driving. h£j- Bro-suan: Some drunken mrr. ure very careful drivers. The Magistrate- Sumo m r n drive very carefully when they “have had a few.’’ They realise the danger. The Magistrate said that it was admitted that shortly before 12 accused and Howson had had three drinks. Shortly after they came back to the hospital accused wenit down town in the car. In his (the Magistrate’s) opinion, the accused was intoxicated, under the meaning ot the Adt, and he must find that be was intoxicated in charge, and convict him. The question of penatty would be deferred until after the hearing of the charge of conversion. Tn connection with the charge ot conversion, similar evidence was given by Howson. Ho said that the accused had no authority to take the car. When the accused brought linear back there were pies, peas, and potatoes making a mess of the eat, having been salt on. Because h c (witness) was careless enough to leave the key in the car, accused had nu reason for thinking that it had been left in for him. To the Magistrate: When he suggested thialt w e go for pies I said that he could get one jf he liken, but 1 said nothing about the eui. To tbe Senior-Sergeant. I would not have lent ithe car if ho had asked me. Mr Brosnan said that the defence would be that the defendant thought that he had the implied consent ot Howson to lake the car. Giving evidence, the accused said that supper was on whi’p Howson ami ho wer e away having the drink**. When they got back he suggested thaib th<y should go for pms. llowsn.. said that he was not going down. r»u he (accused) could go down if b wanted to. When he returned -.vi't the car he did not think there would be any objeoTion on Hewson’s per' The way ho spoke accused thought that he was .giving him permission to take th e car. It would have taken him 50 minutes to hnvn walked dow> for pies and back. When ho (accused) got back, Howson said tha* ne had rung up the poboe and had ro ported that the car was stolen. H - (accused) told him to ring up an . say that it was back, but he said he would have to go down and report it, and he (accused) offered to go down with him and support his story He was not asked to get ouit of the car, and was surprised when he was arrested. To the Senior-Sergeant: My driver’s license has run out. Mr Brosnan objected tn' the 'afJor question, as iit had nothing tn do with the case.

The Magistrate said that he wn ■ satisfied that it was a ease in which he should give any benefit of the doubt to the accused, on the ehiargr of conversion. After reviewing the evidence nt length, the Magistrate saAd that, under the circumstanc-es, he thought it was reasonable, when Howson made the remark about go ing down for the pies, tn think that it was almost an Invitation to /take the car. He thought that it was reasonable for the accused to <think that Howson would nol object tn him taking the ear to get a pie, ami the case would be dismissed. Mr Brosnan remarked that hc thought Howson was fortunate nol tu be charged with drunkenness, • when he admitted having as many drinks as the aceusod. The Benior-S-ergcant said that the accused had a previous conviction for T»e*hg intoxicated in charge of a ear. The M.’agisltrate said that the ae cused was fartiinat f . ‘hat his action did not result in any damage to the car. Recent amendments to ithe Aci had. considerably increased the penalty for conversion. As accused had a previous conviction, he would be fined £4 On the charge of being in- ' toxieatexl in charge of the car. and would be ordered to pay witnesses ’ exp mses ss-. MOTORIST FINED. On the information of Main Highways Traffic Inspector J. H. Clark. Eric Arthur Henderson Bunt was charged with driving a car in a dangerous mianner on the Greymouth-. Runanga highway, on November 9. On behalf of the defendant, Mr A. H. Paterson pleaded not guilty. The Inspecltfon said ’that at> 7.3bp.m, he saw the defendant leave the Grey Motors service station at a very high speed. He followed him up Mawhera Quay and for •■three miles from tlie Cobden bridge. His speed varied from 35 mi'es per hour round some of the corners to 55 in.p.h. on those portions'of the road which were reasonably straight. When going round right hand cuniors defendant was deliberately on the wrong side, and he (witness) cjonsidered Ithiat if i

there had been any traffic about there would have been nu accident. Under Regulation 15 of the Motor Vehicles Regulations, speed was restricted to 15 round corners where ‘the vision was' not clear for 40 feet, and under the regulations the speed limit on any highway other than bitumen or concrete. was 40 m.p.h. To the Magistrate: His speed in town was inclined to be fast, and he turned into Mawhera Quay at about 35 m.p.h., but I have no authority in the borough. Defendant. i n evidence, said that he speeded up a bit to about 35 I m.p.h. where he had a clear view. The car was a new VS, and he did not consider his speed was daejgerous td himself or anyone else. He could see for 40 feet round all corners but one, land he took that verv slowly. He had been driving .for about. 14 years and had always been very careful round corners. To the Magistrate: I did no>‘ biok at the speedometer, but I did not think the speed was excessive. To the Inspector: I understood there wer P no speed regulations outside the borough. The Magistrate .said tjhJnit :iu his opinion 55 m.p.h. was excessive and dangerous, and to take the bends at 35 m.p.h. was also dangerous. Accidents were always happening through speeding motorists, land they must be taught to confine themselves to a reasonable speed. He did not think the. defendant’s (gpced twa,s reiasonaldc, and he would b P convicted and fined £2, with 10s costs. CHARGE FAILS. On the information of Inspector Clark, Albert. Alexander Ironside was charged with driving a ear in a negligent, manner on the ReeftonGreymouth highway, on November G. Mr A. H. Paterson appeared for the defendant/ who pleaded nott guilty. The Inspector said that the defendant was driving towards Greymouth and about three miles on the south side °f Reefton he itook a slight Lend p in the road. After he came round the '!

bend he was right- on his wrong side and continued so for -108 feet, eventually going over th e bank into a ditch, still on the wrong side. Witness arrived a few minutes after the accident, and the tire marks were quite plain. Defendant had misesd the edge of a culvert by ithe miatter of a foot. When the-car was pulled out. there was only slight damage, and the steering was working satisfactorily. Defendant had stated that he thought. the steering had jammed. The fact that he took so long to stop ’ proved that he was travelling at too high a speed, and did not have control of the ear In evidence, defendant said that he had gone over on his wrong side to dodge a pot-hole, iand on his attempting to straighten out the car would not respond to the steering. He was travelling at about 30 miles an hour, but braked, and the ear had almost stopped when it toppled over. The firsib time that the mechanics jacked the car up after pulling it out, the steering seemed alright, but after the Inspector had gone away he tried it out. and found that the tie rod was bent. He was charged for the repairs to th c tie rod iu Ihe account (produced). After reviewing the evidence, the Magistrate said (that he thought there was too much doubt in connection with the steering to convict the defendant. and he would give, him the benefit of the doubt, and dismiss the charge. NEGLIGENT DRIVING. % Arising out .of an accident at Paroa on November 1. Thomas Atkin Gardyne was charged (1) with driving a car without a license; (2) driving in in. negligent manner; (3) failing to report £an accident involving injury to Robert. Oliver Crawford. Defendant pleaded not. guilty to the charge, of negligent driving, but guilty to the* other two charges. Senior-Seregant Ruayle said that a.t 8.30 a.m. Craiwfnrii wa* riding a bicycle towards Aroa when he was

over-run by a car driven by defend amt, and dragged for about 9 feet. Defendant admitted that he had no driver’s license and had failed to report the accident. Robert Oliver Crawford, a fireman on the Bundi Dredge, gave evidence on the lines of the Senior-Sergeant *s statement. He said that he was in the centre of the road, .owing to the deep gravel on the sides, bu< when he heard the car approaching he 3 moved on to his correct side. If he had not held on to the front wheel and the tray front of the car he would have gone underneath. The car passed him on <the wrong side. He suffered an injury to his right leg, and was off work for eleven days. He would not sav that the car was speeding. To ’the defendant: You worn on your wrong side. Louis Edward Morgan, county road man, who arrived just after the accident, . gave evidence of seeing the marks on the road where r Crawford had been dragged The’defendant said h t the fact of the (accident was that Crawford wobbled in the gravel, and he did not know which side he, was going. The only way he (defendan ) could pass him was on the wrong side, but Crawford came over on him. After the accident Crawford had said it was his own fault, but flint hp had done his best to miss him (defendant). The Magis-tratp said that there was some conflict in the evidence, but the defendant should not have tried to pass until ho .was sure that th., cyclist was safe, and .‘hen passed him on the right side. lh- thought thnt under The circumstances the defendant had driven negligent!'” and he. wus‘ b,. convicted On the charge of negligent driving the defendant was fined £2. with 19s °d witnesses’ expenses and 16s costs. On each of the ntht>r two charges he was convicted and ordered to pay 10s Court cos's. MAINTENANCE, Charles Augustus Greefi (Mr T. F. ‘

Brosnan) was charged with the dis obedience of .a maintenance ordei made at Greymouth .on May 27, 1929 and providing for the payment o 25s for fiv e children, the arrears ti November 4. 1935, amounting 'to £l7’ Ils 7d. Defendant applied for tion of the order, and remission a the arrears. After hearing evidence, the Magis trate said that he did not think th! defendant had done what he coni have to assist the State in .the main tenant■ of*?is children over the 13 months. However, he was so fa in arrears he did not think ther was any chance .of him catching up and he (the Magistrate) thought i was a case where he should remit th portion. The arrears would b cancelled, with the exception of £SK On the charge of disobedience of th order, h e would be convicted an< sentenced to three months” imprison merit, the warrant tn be suspende as lohg as he paid 5s per week oi the £5O. in addition to the curreu maintenance of 25s ’ per w» ek whic he (the Magistrate) '.refused to AFFILIATION ORDER. James Galway, who did not appear was adjudged the father of rhe un born child of a young B-ackbal woman, who was represented by M T. F. Brosnan. The Magistrate dfl cit-ed Gnlv.-.v was ’o g l '! by bond of £5O with- the Public T;uW tee, on one approved surety, for hlj obedience to any maintenance ordew that might be made, failing, which iH default would be fixed. He was ordered to pay costs, £2 11s 6J