£20 Fine for Obstructing E.P.S. Wardens

Manawatu Times, Volume 66, Issue 290, 6 December 1941, Page 6

£2O Fine for Obstructing E.P.S. Wardens

DEFENDANT NARROWLY ESCAPES GAOL Per Press Association. AUCKLAND, Dec. 5. “There will be no 4 beg pardons’ about the matter. The public must learn that it must co-operate with the Emergency Precautions Scheme wardens for its own protection and no matter whether offenders are highlyplaced citizens or otherwise they are going to gaol.” These statements were made by Mr. J. H. Luxford S.M., after hearing a charge of using indecent language to two wardens preferred against Ernest Edward Payne, aged 51, a painter. The charge was denied. Evidence was given by two wardens that a light was seen from a window in a cakeshop in Ponsonby Road. Defendant refused to put the light oet and adopted an arrogant attitude, stating that the wardens were “mugs.” Then they said they would call the police and the defendant said they could call as many policemen as they liked and used the language referred to in the charge.

Counsel said the charge of using language was denied. Defendant was neither the proprietor nor occupier of the shop in which on the night in question his wife was making Christmas puddings. The wardens emphasised that defendant was the occupier and he took offence at the repetition. “When I find that wardens have been obstructed the penalties are going to be severe,” said Mr. Luxford, who stated that the charge had been proved. 44 1 have been considering sentencing defendant to imprisonment for 21 dayfs but on reflection I think it would probably be wrong to inflict this sentence in view of the fact that the offence occurred before my announcement after a recent breach of the Lighting Emergency Regulations. A warning was given by the Court that imprisonment would be the penalty for persons breaking tho regulations or lighting restrictions or obstructing or interfering in any way with duties of wardens or com.miting an offence of not co-operating with the wardens.”

“This case has all the ingredients of aggravation and defendant has taken up a truculent attitude in a spirit of obstruction,” said Mr. Luxford, who inflicted a fine of £2O.