MAGISTRATE’S COURT
(Before Mr H. P. Ln wry, S.AI.)
AVEDNESDAY, JULY 4, 1934.
C. AV. Lee was charged with the negligent driving of a motor-cycie. There was no appearance of the defendant.
S. Sharpe stated that he was travelling north and when crossing the intersections at Alill road, his cycle was hit by the cycle ridden by Lee. He had been a fortnight in the hospital as a result of being thrown off his cycle. Defendant was driving at about 35 miles an hour. Constable AlcLennan read a statement by defendant, wherein it was stated that he was travelling at 3) miles an hour, which speed was reduced to 15 miles at the intersections of Alill and Alt. Fyffe roa-ds. His AVorship fined defendant £5 and costs 17/.
Trespassing and Obscene Language. Bernard Joseph Harnett was charged with trespassing on the Wharf Shed at the rifle shooting range, also with using obscene language. Air Anderson appeared for defendant who pleaded not guilty. Archie Turner was similarly charged. Ho pleaded not guilty and elected to be dealt with summarily. Defendants had been asked to leave the rifle range, but this they would not do, stated Constable AlcLennan. J. A. Johnston (President of the Miniature Rifle Club), in evidence stated that he was lessee of the wharf shed, the Miniature Rifle Club using the building on Monday and Friday evenings. Defendants came into the shed under the influence of liquor, and were asked to leave, but would not do so. Witness asked G. Roberts to put Harnett out, which he did, Turner following him. The language complained of was then used. There were 25 ladies present in the building. Both defendants were the worse of liquor, judging by their actions. He considered under the circumstances the Club had the right to forcibly eject them from the shed. Under the rules of the Club any person under the influence of liquor is not allowed in the building. Harnett said witness could not put him out. Steps were taken to ring up the police. Shooting was held up. Roberts was asked to put Harnett out. Roberts and Nelson carried Harnett out through the door. They fell out the door, Turner pushing them from the rear. The language complained of was used after Harnett was ejected. There was a scuffle outside and Roberts was called an offensive name, and Harnett was then struck. The door of the shed was then shut, and further language was used by both Harnett and Turner. The language was used in a loud tone. AV. T. Nilsen gave corroborative evidence, stating that eighty persons were present, a considerable proportion being women. Defendants were under the influence of liquor, and would not leave when requested. Bad language was used outside for a considerable time. There were two distinct voices, and the language could be heard by those in the shed.
George Roberts stated that defendants came through the supper room door, and he heard Johnston ask them to leave. AVitness was asked by Johnston to put Harnett out, which, with the assistance of Nilsen, was done. Offensive language was then vred by the two defendants. As they were putting Harnett’s feet on the ground someone pushed from behind and they all fell. As a result of offensive language he struck Harnett. H. J. Hayward said he was present at the wharf shed on the date mentioned, and defendants were anything but sober. Johnston asked them to leave. Defendants were then led into the supper room. He did not see them put out, as he had left to ring up the police. They secured the shed on condition that they carried out the meetings correctly. Defendants were there when he returned, and wore endeavouring to get in, and using bad language. Mr Anderson said he would plead guilty to the trespass case, but held that the wharf was not a public place.
His Worship st i‘:cd that the Act Lad been widened since the appeal case mentioned by Mr Anderson.
Air Anderson said in that case he would plead guilty to both charges and asked for the Court *s leniency.
His AVorship said for trespass they were liable to a fine of £lO. Harnett would be fined £5 and costs. Turner was fined £2 and costs.
On the charges of use of obscene language defendants could be sent to gaol for 12 months without the option of a fine. The case was a very bad one indeed, and was aggravated by drinking. The only way to check this is to send him to gaol for a term, but as there had been no similar offence he would not send him to gaol, on. condition that he took out a prohibition order and paid the maximum fine of £2O and costs. It was cither that or go to gaol for a term. Turner was fined £lO and costs, and was allowed fourteen days in which to pay. Supplying Liquor After Hours.
E. H. AVorkman was charged with supplying liquor after hours, end with exposing liquor for sale. He pleaded guilty. His AVorship pointed out that as four boarders were present the exposure case must fail.
Constable McLennan said there were extenuating circumstances in the supplying of liquor, owing to sudden illness of a resident.
As the barman and proprietor had not been before the Court previously, the licensee would be fined £2 and costs and the barman £1 and costs.
Three first offenders pleaded guilty to being on the premises after hours. One was fined 10/ and costs 10/.
Another who pleaded guilty, explained that he had been acting as temporary barman during the day and evening. He ha£ left his gloves and mail and later returned to the hotel, when Constable AlcLennan came in. His AVorship said that had defendant made the excuse at the time he might have accepted it. He was ordered to fay 10/ costs. Civil Cases, Judgment was given for plaintiffs in the following cases:— Kaikoura County Uounc.l v. J. R.
Smart, £ll 17/9; W. A. Peoples, £2 11/9 and costs; same v. W. Peoples, £5 9/9; IL L. Withers v. A. Tweedie, £l2 9/ and costs. E. Boyd was ordered tQ pay H. Gabites £5 2/6 at the rate of 2/ per week. In the defended action, G. Poole v. L. Bradburn £lO, value of a horse sold to defendant, Air AV. R. Teape appeared for plaintiff, and Air J. AV. Anderson for defendant. F. Broughan stated that he had approached Bradburn about the purchase of the horse, and he said he had decided to keep the horse. Defendant said plaintiff had offered him the loan of the horse and nothing had been said about purchasing it. He had made no promise to pay for the horse. He had not mentioned to Broughan that he was going to keep the horse. Poole had told defendant to sell the horse for anything he could get for it. He eventually sold the horse in Christchurch, Poole asking h ; ni to do his best. It realised £3 5/ at auction. He advised Poole that the horse had been sold. Airs Bradburn supported her husband’s statements regarding the loan of the horse. Judgment was given for plaintiff for the amount claimed, with costs and witness* expenses. P. IL AVilkinson (Commissioenr of Crown Lands) v. T. Hodgman, claim for possession. Air F. F. Reid appeared for plaintiff. An order was made for possession within two months, Air Reid stated that he would endeavour to arrange for facilities to allow defendant to remove his improvements. In the adjourned action Alere Poharama v. P. J. Boyd, claim £l4 5/6 for trespass and damages, Air Tcapo appeared for plaintiff and Mi Anderson for defendant. Judgment was given for £2 and costs £1 16/.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/KAIST19340705.2.8
Bibliographic details
Kaikoura Star, Volume LIV, Issue 52, 5 July 1934, Page 2
Word Count
1,298MAGISTRATE’S COURT Kaikoura Star, Volume LIV, Issue 52, 5 July 1934, Page 2
Using This Item
The Greymouth Evening Star Co Ltd is the copyright owner for the Kaikoura Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of the Greymouth Evening Star Co Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.