MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVIII, 29 August 1924, Page 4

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

WEEKLY SITTING. The weekly sitting of the Magistrate’s Court was continued yesterday afternoon, Mr J. S. Barton, S.M., presiding. BY DEFAULT. Judgment for the plaintiff with costs against the defendant was given in each of the following undefended civil cases: —Curtis and Spragg v. H. Dudding and L. V. Julian, £6 13s 6d; W. M. Thomson v. Tamaka Awarua, £4 4s; A. Hetrick and Co., Ltd., v. L. Thomas, £3 15s; F. J. Boasev. F. Kimball, £2.15s 6d. JUDGMENT SUMMONSES. Orders were made in the following judgment summons cases:—W. McNiven v. A. H. Sorenson, £ls 14s 4d; L. Houlahan v. Nawaka, £3O 18s Id.

Mr Houston, for the County Council, asked for an order on a. judgment summons against a native named Pouwharemu Toi. The judgment, which, was for £l3O 13s lid, was for rates, and other natives had told the. county clerk that they would pay their rate’s when Toi paid. Toi was a well-known native, and was regarded as having independent means. Some time ago Toi had headed a deputation which waited on the Minister at Wellington, with a complaint that some of their land had been taken for the paymept of rates. Mr Coates had pointed out that- the natives could not object to paying rates. Proceeding, Mr'Houston said that when served with a summons Toi had said, “I suppose I will have to pay.” “We now propose to make him pay,”- concluded -Mr Houston.

The order, as' requested, was accordingly made. '

FAMA V. BROWN. t, 9, ase ' n which B. A. Fama (Mr F. C. Spratt) claimed £lO from H. Brown (Mr Bavley), being the balance of an amount agreed to be paid for labour employed ii\ the building of a house, was concluded, judgment being reserved.

DANGEROUS DRIVING. The case in which T. K. Moody and H. Jenkins were charged by the police with driving in a manner dangerous to the public, was continued. Alexander Muir, continuing his evidence, said that after the accident Jenkins had said that when he first saw the danger he applied his brakes, but on seeing that his car was not pulling up as quickly as it should and an accident was inevitable if lie continued applying the brakes, he accelerated, thinking he would b e able to get past. -

Walter Stanley Smart, foreman of the Farmers’ Co-op. garage, said that judging by the damage done the Buick had been travelling fast. Had the Overland been travelling fast the right-hand side of' the Buick, where the Overland hit it would have been damaged more. Whether the Buick was spewing in order to avoid a colcould not say. Mr Houston, in opening his case for Jenkins, said his client was an experienced driver. On the date in question he approached the intersection where the accident occurred at from 20 to 25 miles per hour, which speed might be summed up at a fair average speed. He submitted that Jenkins did drive in a manner dangerous to the public, and he was entitled to assume that any traffic coming out of a side’ road would observe the rule of the road. Mr Houston proceeded to quote the law on the subject, which stated clearly that it was the duty of traffic on a side road to give wav to traffic on a mam -road. Henry Jenkins said he had been driving a car for the • past six years. As he approached the intersection he was driving at about 20 to 25 miles per hour. He first saw Moody. approaching when he (witness) was about 25 yards from the corner, and Moodv was about 50 yards a wav from the same corner. Consequently' he did not reckon, on haying to take Moody’s ear into account in watching the approaches to the intersection. Later, when he saw that an accident was inevitable, he swerved to the left as far as he could and accelerated in an endeavour to get past. He was in Collins Street when he accelerated, and he had got halt way across the intersection when he heard the crash. After the accident Moody said to him, “It was a pure accident.’’ Amy Jenkins, wife of defendant, in evidence, said that when she first sau Moody’s car it was further troni the corner than their car was. His \\ orship, in delivering judgment, said he was satisfied that T. K. Moodv must convicted. Defendant had come up the Beach Road to the South. Road in broad daylight, and although the intervening corner was a vacant section he had not seen the other car until it was too late. It was clear evidence of negligence, and it was no excuse that the visibility was low or he was hampered by side curtains. Jenkins also must be convicted. He must know that he had no- right whatever to take a car at 20 to 25 miles Pei hour on that part of the road. He had driven Ins car at such speed that hen he saw a car he could not stop. Ihe corner was a dangerous one-, and he had shown a reckless disregard for irf p n? f h f tS ? f ? t}ier users of the road; Lach defendant was fined £3. with 9s pense, s eXPenSeS 10s witness ’ ex-

BY-LAW CASE. Wm Hayward (Mr F. C. Sm-attl 'vas charged with driving a dray* with tyres °f less width than those required hfws 6 Taranaki Counties’ joint by- •,^ r Riston, for the County Council, said that Hayward had driven a ?v 9 herens a ?h° f f fngle , ° n five-inch tyres. \! he i tyres for such a load Should have been seven inches in Mr Spratt) said that defendant had S ree dr ? ys ’ tH '° of had been on the €d at a COst of £4 ° and on the occasion m question he had have e on a the eaVlei ’ I<>ad than heshould Stood +w e + v, arrmver tyres. He underS? 4 th ® r ? were ot her contracts. iS? 1518 '•’ 1 i h ty ?® 8 to ° narrow for He Ca / ri€d ’ - nd perhaps this was the fiist of a series of such charges. imposed ° f ° S and 7s CoUrt costs was FOUND DRUNK. A first offending inebriate appeared before Mr J. Q. Osborne, this morning. 3 ’ Sergeant Henry said that defendant had been found drunk in town vesterday afternoon, but had been released on bail during the evening. Defendant was a statutory first offender, hut he naa been three times convicted within a short period in 1920. A conviction was recorded, and a hne of 5s was imposed.