CITY POLICE COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20958, 22 February 1930, Page 23

CITY POLICE COURT.

Friday, February 21. (Before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M.) _ -s ‘ TRESPASS ON RACECOURSE. James Dennis Duggan was charged with trespassing on ■ For Bury Park racecourse during the progress of a race meeting, and,was fined £2 10s, and costs (10s).— Ned Lahood, who was similarly charged, was fined 30s, and costs (10s). . CARELESS MOTORISTS. Robert Kilpatrick Martin was fined ss, and costs (10s), for riding an unlighted motor cycle. ,-i?4 wa J d Lahood was fined 20s, and costs > lor failing to stop at the signal ot a traffic constable., ~ Charged with driving an unlicensed motor car, Frederick Charles Denham Y? s , et * *3, and costs (10s), —Bruce Alexander Ford was similarly charged in respect of a motor cycle, and was lined 10s, and costs (10s), and a conviction was entered against him for failing to have the. prescribed lights on his cycle. ; A CASE ADJOURNED. James Mayne, for. whom Mr E. J. Anderson appeared, pleaded not guilty to having failed to give way at a street intersection to traffic approaching from the right.—After police evidence was heard, the defendant gave evidence, and the case -was adjourned for a week to allow another witness for the defence to be produced. ; A COUNCILLOR FINED. , .Edgar A. Fox, who was previously found guilty on charges of acting as a councillor on the Oamaru Borough Council when he was incapacitated from doing so- and of taking part in a discussion before the council relating to a matter in which he had pecuniary interest, was comacted nnd fined court costs (10s) with solicitor’s fee (£3 3s) on the first charge,' and fined £lo.‘with costs (10s) (10s). and solicitor’s tee (£3 3s) on the second. AFTER-HOUR TRADING.

®, urre l ' waa represented by Mr Hanlon, pleaded guilty to having exposed liquor, for sale after gub-inspector Cummings said that on bunday, January 26. two constables visited the Oval Hotel, and found three men inside. The licensee’s son, on being asked why they were there, said that hi, supposed they had come for a drink. Furmer investigation revealed two more men 1 ?,, a room.—Mr Hanlon said that although the .licensee was on .the . premises when the police arrived he had been th 9 re only a minute or two. His son was rea ly responsible for the offence.—ln reply to a query by. the magistral o . the sub-inspector said that the licensee’s conduct was generally satisfactory, but the son waa inclined t 6 take advantage of every. opportunity.—His Worship adjourned the case for a week, stating that in the meantime arrangements satisfactory to the police must be made for the son to leave the hotel.

ADULTERATED WHISKY, William Dawson. Cowie, licensee of the gridiron Hotel, was charged with failing to destroy a label on a whisky bottle containing a different brand to that designated on the label, and, further, with having- adulterated whisky.—Mr Hanlon ?P p 1S r ., for the, defendant, and Mr W ■ //presented the Health Department.—Mr Taylor; said that the department a inspector had purchased some whisky purporting to be Dewar’s at the defendant s • hotel m November last On analysis. liquor was found to V>ifTer .materially from Dewar’s! Hanlon stated that when the offence was committed the defendant was out of town. There was very little whisky : drunk in the hotel, and the barman, finding ( that the whisky was running low in two of the bottles "on the shelf, emptied the one. into the other,—A fine of £25, with costs (10s), and Crown solicitor’s tee (£3 3s), was imposed on the first charge, and the defendant was convicted and fined court costa (10s), with Crown solicitor’s fee (£3 3s) on the second. He was also ordered to pay the analyst’s fee (£1 0s 6d), 1 Similar charges-, to those in the preceding _ case 1 were preferred against Frederick'Griffiths Paape, licensee of the Oban Hotel (Mr Paterson) .—Mr Taylor ,stated_ that the facts were the same as those in the charges against the defendant Gpwie, with -. the - exception that the charges concerned a bottle of Teacher’s whisky.—The defendant, in evidence, stated that on the day the inspector called he had taken samples. of other whiskies besides Teacher’s, and these had proved to Re satisfactory. He was at a loss to understand how the liquor’ could nave been interfered with, although, after the inspector had visited him, he had had occasion to discharge one of his barmen whom he suspected of adulterating whisky. —On the first, charge the defendant was /fined £25, with costs (10s), Crown eoliicitor’s fee (£3 3s), and was ordered to 'Pay the analyst’s fee (£1 2s 6d), On the second he was convicted and ordered to pay court costs (10s) and Crown solicitor’s'fee (£3 3s). BREAKING AND ENTERING.

Henry Ernest Vincent Foote appeared on remand oh a charge of having broken and entered the dwelling of Hugh Thomas Speight and . stolen money and goods of a total value of £6 16s.—Hugh Thomas opeight stated in evidence that on returning to his residence in York place onSunday last, he met his sister and two men bringing. the accused back to the house. The accused produced from his pockets the money, and goods mentioned in the charge, and which witness identified as his property.—Detective Jenvey, who arrested the accused, produced a signed statement in which ! the latter admitted the- offence, —The accused pleaded guilty and was committed to the Supreme Court tor sentence, bail being, refused. : INCOME TAX CASE. .Leon Curtis (Mr W. Ward) was charged on five counts of having wilfully made a false return of income to the commissioner of taxes* and alternatively on five counts of negligently making a false return of income.—Mr Ward intimated that the defendant intended pleading guilty to. failing negligently to make a re? turn, but not to wilfully omitting to do so— Mr W. D. Taylor, who appeared for the commissioner of taxes, said that the department did not consider that the defendant, who was the licensee of MRride’s' ilotel, Queenstown, had been merely necthat had wilfully evaded his obligations. The charges covered- a Of five years—from March 31, 192 °- during which time the defendant paid five separate sums totalling 17s lid into the Post Office Savings AJnnk, and ‘omitted to include, this amount in his income tax re™naA When questioned by the inspecdefendant said that this amount i^f^ GSented i refunds.,on returned empty bottles, crates, and casks, and interest on - , Moreover, when first interviewed by the inspector,' the i nt A appearetl considerably nonR requested to produce his Post Office Savings Bank book, and rehad forgotten to mention the refunds from empties, which, he said amounted . to approximately £SO per annum.—Evidence to this effect was given by Frederick Benjamin Ahum, an inspec mor,f D ovr* and Income Tax Department—Mr Ward submitted that in the charge of wilful evasion there was no case to -answer.—His Worship said that the et i e ll *he evidence were clear 5 & th ® defendant’s intent to defraud. Mr Ward, at this stage, entered a protest against the defendant having been brought to Dunedin for trial.—His Worship agreed with Mr Ward, and expressed the opinion that the prosecution had adopted a most arbitrary procedure in insisting on the, case being heard in Dunr , defendant s explanation was he had erred through ignorance and not through ank wish to evade payment of tax, although he admitted that when the inspector 'wished to see his Post Gffice. Savings Rank book he began to feel uneasy, and it occurred to him sometimes when he was paying into the savings bank whether he was doing right or ™g.-His Worship said that there was no doubt that defendant had acted wil«oy' r. fl OU J d J’uuuuvictcd and fined £59 on the first of the charges of wilful failure to furnish returns, £3O on each of the other four, and court costs (lOs) and sohcitor’s fee (£3 3s). The five charges of negligently fading to furnish returns would be withdrawn.