CITY POLICE COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23002, 3 October 1936, Page 7

CITY POLICE COURT

Friday, October 2 (Before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M.) UNLICENSED WIRELESS For being in possession of an unlicensed radio set, Cecil Hubert Tooley was fined 4s 2d, the proportion of the licence fee in arrear, and costs (11s). CHIMNEY FIRES For allowing the chimney of his premises to catch fire, William Wilson was fined 5s and costs (10s). — Similarly charged, Thomas Gibson Waters was fined a like amount, with costs (10s). CASTING OFFENSIVE MATTER Two men, whose names were suppressed, were charged with casting offensive matter in Bond street.— The magistrate commented on the absurdity of closing the public convenience at the Exchange at 11 p.m. and asked that the corporation sanitary inspector (Mr King) should explain the position to the court. — Mr King stated that the question of extending the hours during which the conveniences should remain open had not been considered recently by the City Council, but if such an action was necessary. for the convenience of the public he had no doubt that the council would consider the matter.—The charges were dismissed subject to the payment of court costs (10s) in each case. MOTORING OFFENCES Donald Cobden, an unlicensed motor driver, Was fined 20s and costs (10s). —Similarly charged, John Thomas Neill, whose licence was suspended for two years in July last, was fined £lO and costs (10s). —Ivop Robert Prescott, against whom two similar charges were preferred, and who had been prohibited from driving, was fined £lO and costs (10s) on the first charge, and on the second was convicted and ordered to come up for sentence at any time within the next 12 months if called upon. John Ewart pleaded guilty to negligently driving a motor car and to being an unlicensed driver.—lt was stated that the defendant had collided with a cyclist on Anderson’s Bay road, and it was later found that he did not possess a licence.—On the formei charge a fine of £3 and costs (10s) was imposed, the defendant’s licence was cancelled, and he was prohibited from driving for three months. On the other information a conviction was entered. Eric Duncan Sargison pleaded guilty to a charge of passing another vehicle on an intersection and was fined £1 10s and costs (10s). David Cunningham was fined 5s and costs (10s) on a charge of driving a motor car that was not equipped with the prescribed lights. PROHIBITED PERSON CHARGED William Hill Stewar pleaded not guilty to a charge of procuring liquor during the currency of a prohibition order.—The defence put forward by Mr G. T, Baylee for the defendant was that he had not procured liquor from any other person, but had manufactured it himself.— The defendant, in evide* , said he had consumed some beer, which he brewed himself, at 1.30 p.m. He had had no other liquor.—The matter was adjourned for a week to allow the magistrate to consider the submission put forward by Mi Baylee. INTOXICATED MOTORIST Allan John Wilson, who was represented by Mr K. Rutherford, appeared for sentence on a charge of being intoxicated while in charge of a motor car.—The magistrate said he had considerable hesitation in not imposing a term of imprisonment, but the accused had already been in the cells for a week Taking into consideration this fact and his financial circumstances, he would be fined £l2 10s. with medical expenses (£1 Is) and cab fare (2s 6d), his licence would be cancelled, and he would be prohibited from driving for two years. MILK VENDOR CHARGED George Alfred Brookes, who was represented by Mi W H. Carson, was charged with failing to pay the minimum rate of wages to an employee, and with employing a boy under 16 years of age before 7 a.m. —Mr W. H. Cadwallader, an inspector of awards who prosecuted, said that the boy in question was 13 years of age, and had been employed on a milk run by the defendant for the past two years For the first year, he had been given four pints of milk a day and 8s 6d ;n cash, and for the second year he had been allowed two pints of milk daily and 3s 6d per week Mr Cadwallader • went on to say that the effect of such employment on boys of tender years was extremely detrimental.—Mr Carson contended that the defendant was not an occupier of a shop as defined by the Shops and Offices Act. but worked from a base as a milk vendor It was admitted that the boy was on the milk cart before 7 a.m.. and that he did not receive the wage prescribed by the Act. but in the circumstances the defence maintained that the section of the Act upon which the prosecution appeared to be relying did not apply.—Mr Cadwallader submitted that beyond doubt the defendant was the occupier of a shop within the meaning of the Act.— His Worship intimated that he would take time to consider his decision. NEGLIGENT DRIVING

Joseph Addison Young Todd (Mr W. D. Taylor) pleaded not guilty to charges of negligent driving and of passing a stationary tramcar.—Sergeant O’Shea said that on the evening of August 21 the defendant drove past a Si Clair tram at the corner of Grosvenor street and knocked down a woman passenger who had just alighted. The women received a broken bone in her foot as a result. —Evidence was given by Robert Campbell M'Parlane. the conductor on the tram, who said that when the tram stopped at Grosvenor street a woman alighted and was walking towards the kerb when a motor car, which came between her and the .footpath, struck her a glancing blow and knocked her down. The tram, which had started again, was immediately stoppgd, but as the woman, from her own statement, was apparently uninjured, it went on again after a few minutes. —Corroborative evidence was given by Merlyn Vivienne Arthur, who admitted to Mr Taylor that the tram had not come to a complete standstill before she alighted, James Burt Douglas, the driver of the tram, and Constable Timmins.—The defence alleged that the cause of the accident was the action of the complainant in alighting fror the tram while it was in motion The defendant, when overtaking the tram, it was stated, noticed *ht! i 4 slowed down for the Grosvenor street intersection, and that it again accelerated its pace When the defendant went to pass it the complainant jumped off and was struck by the back mudguard. the defendant having swerved to the left in an endeavoui to avert an accident.—'"he magistrate held that the defendant obviously not been keeping a good look out, or he would have seen the complainant leaving the tram He would be convicted on the first charge and