BREACHES OF BY-LAWS.

Manawatu Standard, Volume L, Issue 88, 11 March 1930, Page 2

BREACHES OF BY-LAWS.

MAGISTRATE’S COURT CASES. PENALTIES FOR OFFENDERS. Penalties were inflicted by Air .1. L. Stout, S.M., in the Magistrate s Court yesterday on a number of offendei-, charged with breaches of the by-laws. Charges of not possessing a drivers license and of driving a motor car on the Whakarongo Road in a manner which might have been dangerous to the public were preferred against Hankino Granville Duff, ‘ who pleaded Whitehouse stated that defendant had passed two cars driving abreast, and in doing so had met a third. His attempt to pass a line of traffic under the circumstances was most dangerous, as it was the day of the Pahiatua races. In extenuation of the offence. Mr Ongley stated that defendant had been a iicensed driver for twelve years in another district, but had failed to renew his license. Another car drew oil to allow him to pass, and he did not see the approaching vehicle owing to the sun. He was a married man with five children and was earning £4 per week. , ... Fines of 10s and £2 respectively were inflicted by His Worship, with costs and witnesses’ expenses amounting to £3 13s.

CROSSING THE RAILWAY LINE. Lawrence Samuel Gandy, a Veilington traveller, was charged with crossing the railway line in the Square near the Post Office when it was not clear. A plea of guilty was entered. A fine of £2, with 10s costs, was imposed, liis Worship commenting that defendant would have to be more careful. Pleas of guilty were entered by Clarence Houghton to charges of ci ossing the railway line at Bunnythorpe when it was not clear and failing to stop at a compulsory sign. The Magistrate to Senior-Sergeant Whitehouse: I presume that you will withdraw the second charge. It is impracticable. , Ti . Senior-Sergeant Whitehouse: It is a Railway Department prosecution. The Magistrate: But the first offenre covers the second. . Senior-Sergeant AVlutehouse: It a penalty is imposed on the first charge the second can probably be withdrawn. Senior-Sergeant Whitehouse stated that defendant was nearly struck by the daylight Limited express. Defendant said lie did not hear the whistle and did not see the train, which'must have been near the station, approaching until he was actually on the line. He then had no alternative but to go on, and just Managed to get across in time. His Worship imposed a fine ot with 12s costs on the first charge, and entered a conviction without penalty on the tecond. HORN NOT SOUNDED.

Failure to sound a warning device when driving his car in Fitzherbert Avenue was responsible tor the appearance of E. R. Chapman in Court. Senior-Sergeant Whitehouse said that defendant was backing out on to the road and a collision almost occurred with another car. Tho driver of the other car was drunk and came past at about fifty miles an hour. 1 an endeavouring to collect sufficient evidence now to put him in the same position as I am,” stated defendant. “He will be in a much worse position than you, if that is the case,” commented the Magistrate. . Senior-Sergeant W’hitehouse said that the complaint had been investigated. Arrangements were made for the police to stop the car on the bridge at Shannon, ana it was found that the driver, who was with a companion, was not drunk. Defendant was fined 10s, with 10s costs, the Magistrate commenting that whatever the conduct of the other driver it offered no excuse for defendant’s omission. MAINTENANCE ORDER SOUGHT. Isobol Henry, of Dunedin, sought a maintenance order against William James Henry, salesman, of Christchurch. Mr Ongley appeared for defendant and applied for a week’s adjournment. “I must object to an adjournment,” stated Mr Laurenson for complainant. “The proceedings were issued some months ago. I think, that defendant is simply evading the issue. He was served in February last and knew that the case was coming on. If he had wanted an adjournment he had ample time to arrange it previously. He had last July agreed to pay maintenance to complainant, but she has only received one amount of £2 since then. Complainant has come all the way from Dunedin and would be stranded if tfaere was a week’s adjournment.” “It is difficult to understand why the proceedings have been brought here,” stated Mr Ongley. “because complainant lives in Dunedin and defendant in Christchurch. The parties were divorced about seven months ago on the grounds of mutual separation. Defendant agreed to pay maintenance, but things became so hard that he could not pay.” His W’orsliip: Where was the divorce granted P Mr Laurenson: At Palmerston North in August. His Worship: Why has this case been brought here? Mr Laurenson said that proceedings had been brought at Palmerston North because complainant’s mother was in a delicate state of health in Dunedin, and she did not wish her to worried. His Worship: Under the circumstances I cannot see any reason for an adjournment. If complainant likes to come up here and start proceedings it is not the business of the Court. Mr Laurenson asked tho Magistral to fix an interim maintenance payment of £2 for a week to complainant, who would otherwise be stranded. “I am not going to encourage people to go all over New Zealand and take proceedings wherever they like,” observed His Worship in granting a week’s adjournment. MISCELLANEOUS. Charges of failure to notify the de-puty-registrar of the name and address of the new owner of a motorvehicle within seven days of a sale, and of using a car without the registration certificate being endorsed by the deputy-registrar were preferred against Magnus Motors and lan Macpherson respectively. Each was. fined £l. with 10s‘costs.

For parking his car more than ten feet from the kerb in the Square W. W. Smith was fined 10s, with 12s costs. Penalties of 10s with 10s costs in each case were imposed on R. Elliott, P. Franldyn, E. Martin, D. McDowall G. Piercey, N. Rush and M. H. Whiteman for cycling on the footpath.