MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 3 October 1929, Page 5

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

THURSDAY, OCT. 3rd. (Before W. Meldrum, Esq., S.M.) LICENSING ACT. On charges of being on licensed premises after hours offenders were dealt with as follows : Two offenders (Club Hotel) ordered to pay costs 10s each. lour men (Pioneer Hotel). Two were fined jj2 and costs 10s each, and the other two ordered to pay costs' 10s each. One man (Masonic Hotel) ordered to pay costs 10s and for being on licensed premises while prohibited he was fined os and costs 10s. MOTOR REGULATIONS. j The, police charged Sidney Yardley with driving a motor car when unlicensed. Fined 10s and costs 10s.

AMUSEMENT TAX.

Commissioner of Stamps (Mr Park) v N. Jones and A. A. Adams (Mr Seddon) charged oi failure to pay amuse, ment tax. Mr Seddon stated the charge arose from- the non-payment of amusement tax (which had since been parti) by the West Coast Rugby Union. The secretary (N. Jones) was convicted and to pay costs 10s, solicitor 21s, The president was convicted without costs. WANDERING CATTLE. Borough Inspector (Mr Park) v J, P. Goulson, a charge of allowing a horse to ri-ander! Fined os. and costs 10s. solicitor £1 Is. • Same v R. J. Pedder 1 horse. Fined os. arid costs 10s., solicitor £1 le. | Same v B. E. Coyle, 1 'cow. Fined 10s. arid costs 10s., solicitor £1 Is. ' j Same v T. Coyle senr., 1 cow. The evidence was that the cow had trespassed on a private property and the cow had been driven off by direction of the Inspector, and then the charge was laid for wandering. The Magis, trate said that it was not the duty of the Inspector to follow that course: The property owner had the power to impound or sue for trespass. It was not the duty of the Inspector to cause an offence to be made. Charge dismissed. .• V •' • ' I

• A similar against M. Connelly was also, dismissed. • Same v H! J. Kearns, 1 horse. Fined 10s. and costs 10s. solicitor 21?., . 1

Same v T. Stopforth, 1 horse. Fined 10s. ‘ costs 10s., solicitor 21s. *

MAINTENANCE ORDER,

H. J. Dunn (Mr Elcock) application for cancellation of maintenance order.. Objected to by Mrs Dunn, after hearing evidence the application was granted and order cancelled. i Police v H. J. Dunn application for maintenance order in favour of two children. Order made for ss. per week for each child. / . - ' ! CIVIL CASE.

Higgins and Co. Ltd. (Mr Murdoch) v. ,T. M. Wall ape claim for,£lo3 3s Id for supply of timber to Lambton'A Co. under guarantee by T. M: Wallace. Judgment for amount claimed with costs 70s, solicitor £5 Is. ,An order was also made for immediate execution on the application of Mr Murdoch, in order to take proceedings for bankruptcy against the defendant, Thomas McKaue Wallace. ,