MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 3234, 3 April 1917, Page 5

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

SATURDAY MARCH 31, 1917. (Before II A Young. Dsr|., S.AI.) S:ewart Gray. Fiank'»'i. was charged by the Pol.oe, under -c-lion 50, part'Vl of the Defence Act, 1916, with failing to register in writing to the prescrilted officer so soon as he became liable to serve under the said Act. Defendant pleaded not guilty, s:at!ng that ha had registered in the name of John Stewart Gray. S!3.M. Bishop, Warrant Officer, who represented tne Defence Department. stated that the 'name Stewart Gray appealed in their hooks. Apparently there had been a mistake in not e-n:ering the full name. The charge was withdrawn. \V. S. and Edward Kavanagh, K.iwarau Falls. Frauktou, were similarly charged and both pleaded not guilty, stating that Uefore leaving the Lower Shotover school they had as.ved the schoolmaster to register them. S.S.M. Bishop told the Court that neither of the defendants names we're on the roll and they had therefore missed their training anjd concentration camps. Both defendants were convicted and discharged. NOXIOUS WEEDS CASES.

W. Wilson, Inspector under the Noxious Weeds Act, sued H. Harris for failing to clear Canadian this'Je and sweet briar oil certain lands in block 11, Shotover. DefendaTit pleaded not guilty The Inspector gave evidence in support of the charge. There were about 40 acres' on which the weed- were growing and it would take three or four days to cut the briar and one dav io cut .the thistles. i>efendant stated that the weeds were more or less prevented from seeding through the cattle eating the heads off. He had, moreover, partly cut the weeds down when he.got the notice and the work was now finished. A conviction was entered and defendant was ordered to "pay a fine of 10s, with court "costs Is, and expense of service 4s. Same v. H. R. Angelo for failing to clear sweet briar off sections 89 and 19 and r2O, block 21, Shotover Survey District. • The Inspector stated that the sweet briar was also growing alongside the property on the roadside. It would take three days to to cut it. Defendant, who pleaded not guilty, said that the Inspector was rather hard on him. He was gradually putting his land under cultivation and had now cut the briars away. He did not cut ahem until after they had seeded. A line of 10s was inflicted, with court costs 7s.

Same v. J. J. Mcßride. for failing to clear sweetbriar off sections 31 and 40, block I, .Mid-Wakatipu. This case was dismissed without prejudice at last court on account, of there being a doubt about the exact boundary of the property. ! Defendant pleaded not guilty. The Inspector again stated the case for'his department. He also mentioned that he had made another inspection of the boundary lines and was satisfied that the ground belonged to defendant. Evidence was also given by Jas. McNaughton. Government rabbiter. The witnesses were cross-examined at considerable length by the defendant in regard to the pegs and area of the sections. Inspector told defendant., in answer to questions, that he worked in a cheese factory oefore he joined the Department; he was brought up on a farm and had had a srood deal of experience with noxious weeds. He did not discriminate in bringing cases to court. H:s Worship stated that he was satisfied plaintiff had correctly identified the ground and he lined defendant 30s, with court costs 7s. -Same v. Estate of W. F. Inder (D. Harvey executor) for failing to clear Canadian thistles off section 28, block 9, Sliotover Survey district. In proving his case, the inspector stated that it would take five days to cut the thistles. Mr W. Turton, who represented defendants, stated that no action could be taken at the proper time as the executors were in the process of obtaining probate of the late owner's will. The executors had, moreover, received no notice with reference to the noxious weeds growing on the property. His Worship took the special circumstances into account and impo-ed the minimum fine of 10s with costs of court, 7s.

Same v. T. Elliott, failing to dealCanadian thistle, and sweetbriar ou Runs 26 and 21, Shotover survey District, run 34 Polnoon and Skippers, sections 3. 12, and 13. block XVi, and sections 4i), £9 and 71, block IV. Shotover Survey District. Mr W. Turton, who appeared on behalf of defandant, pleaded not guilty. The Inspector, sworn, stated that a considerable amount of sweetDriar was growing l on the runs, especially between Maori Point and the Branches ,and from Macetown to Bush Greek. During a visit on February sth he found that no thistles had been cut; the stock had eaten off some, of the heads. It would have taken two days to cut the thistle-. Cross-examined: Did not say any thing to the manager of the ran that he would be agreeable to leave over the cutting of sweetbriar till the winter. Tola defendant that if he would cut the (thistles in time he would not sue on this account. The cattle partly kept the latter down. W. J. McCulloch, Fields Supervisor, and J. McNaughton also gave evidence.

J. W. Miller, manager for Elliott I Km-... stated that the Inspector fame to him at a very time and asked him to clear the thistles and briar then, lie cut the thistle down but had not. burnt them at the time nf the Injector's next visit. The reason for this was that it was 100 dangerous to make a (ire at that time oa account of everything beim: so dry. Witness admitted rhal th<-swei-thriar was bad above Maori I'oint and other parts of ihn run. bill he had held over any action till the winter in view of what took place lrfUween himself and the Inspector. In his opinion it would take a year or so to clear the sweet briar off tli" whole of the property. _ It had not, however, increased. Elliott Bros, had only acquired the station twelve months a:ro and could not be held responsible tor the state of the country. During their ownership he had cleared some of the briar between the station and Maori Point. Witness diso mentioned the difficulty in getlinir labour. Hv t!i" Court: There was 1 no conililion in the :ease that the noxious weeds lie cul down. He had been euttin-/ 'town the sweet, briar every ve.n t hit he had Irfwui in charge of the station except this year: could not say exactly how long it would take to cut down the sweet hriar on account of there tieing such a big area of country. They ran over 12,000 sheep on the- country.

His Worship, in summing up, said that it. was admitted that the sweet briar was very bad on this property and none of it had been cut last season and apparently no effort had been made to |get men to do the work. A fine of £lo would be imposed, with costs 7s. F. Y. Milnes v. J. C. Mcßride, claim for CI Us ")d for goods supplied. Judgment by default for amount claimed with costs. F. Y. Milnes v. Edgar and Mcßride. --Claim for C 3 5s for goods supplied. J. Edgar appeared tin the Court and stated that he was not Liable for any portion o r the amount as the gtwds were ordered by J. C. Mcßride on his own account. hi reply to the Court Mr Edgar stated that he had not given any notice to defend the case a> he did 1 not think it <\\n< his business to do so. He just wished to defend himself against being charged jointly for the goods. They wcvv not always tin partnership: sometimes they were partners and sometime* iiiot. The Magistrate gave judgment for the amount and told the defendant. Edgar, that he would .have to adjust! matters with Mr Mcßride. The costs were 8s Land solicitor's fee ss. BREACH OF MOTOR BY-LAWS. K.J. Powell, County Inspector, sued G. S. Edle. Crown Terrace, for committing a bre.ieh of the Lake County by-laws by motoring on a prohibited road-viz., Tobin's track, on the sth Ma vli. Mr W .Turton appeared in support of the plaintiffs. Defendant, who was unrepresented, pleaded guilty to the charge. He sai | thii he. could not get out of his pl.t ■ ■ unless he u-ed a prohibited mad. To reach Arrowlown via the Zig-Zaj road he had to motor ten miles, wnerea-s, by Tobin's, there was only a distance of 1\ miles logo. He though> .it a very unjust thing to allow motorists on the Skippers road, which was a prohibited road also, wilh-ui: taking action against offenders. . ('.muse! for the plaintiffs stated that after the Frank ton road cases were dispose lof a new start was made to detect, oreaches of the motor bylaws. Defendant was convicted of the offence and was ordered to pay solicitor's fee U'2 2s, witnesses' expenses £2 Bs. and (••cart costs lis.