APPEALS.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVI, Issue 14202, 26 October 1906, Page 5

APPEALS.

- [Peii Press Association.] DUNEDIN, October 25. The reserved decision of Mr Justice Chapman was read to-day in two appeals against decisions of Mr Cruicxsliank, "S.M., who convicted "W. Marshall and M., Liston at Ealclutha, on charges of keeping liquor for sale in a ...no-licens® • district. Liston was fined. £SO and Marshall sentenced to three months’ imprisonment. After reciting the fact®, his Honor said that the whole question as to the main point was whether the Magistrate acted upon reasonable evidence in holding, that liquor had been taken into a no-license district. His Honor thought the Magistrate had taken a course which was proper under the circumstances. He virtually offered an adjournment if defendants would submit to be sworn and explain what had become of the liquor purchased. The Magistrate’s inference was strengthened by defendants abstaining from doing what a man who had an explanation to offer would have done. He did not see why the Magistrate should not attach some importance to the failure to explain facts of this kind. The appeal could not succeed on these grounds. In "W. Marshall’s case there was a second point. It was argued that the evidence of previous convictions more than five years’ old ought not to have b<*en received. After examining all the Statutes on the subject, and consulting with other Judges, his Honor said he was satisfied that the protective effect

of Section 204 extended to the case. Marshall’s appeal must be upheld. This was not, however," 'a case of quashing a conviction. Here the only sentence was without jurisdiction, and bad. The proper order was to remit the matter to the Magistrate to inflict proper punishment, and that order was made. As appellant had to appeal to avoid imprisonment, he was entitled to costs. Liston’s appeal was dismissed with £7 7s costs. Marshall’s appeal was. allowed in the terms stated with £7 7s costs.