A TRESPASS CASE.

Otago Witness, Issue 2504, 19 March 1902, Page 49

A TRESPASS CASE.

OAMARU, March 11. Major Keddell, S.il., to-day gave judgment in the long-pending case against William Norman of trespassing on the racecourse, which is a reserve. He -dismissed the case, on the gTOund that the by-law was unreasonable and too comprehensive. Costs (£2 2s; were allowed the defendant.

Major Kcddell's judgment for the defendant on Tuesday, says the Oarnaru Mail, in the case Biick'ey v. Norman, will have come as a surprise to those who remember the same magistrate's decision in the case of Peter Grant, charged by the Trustees of the of the Oamaru racecourse reserve, some years ago, with a similar offence to Norman's. In that instance Mr Solomon for the defence submitted that the by-law, the same as that under which Norman was proceeded against, was harsh and unreasonable, and_ therefore invalid. In giving his decision Major Keddell said he did not think the by-law unreasonable. Had defendant not indulged, in betting after being warned he would not have committed an offence. He was satisfied, however, that defendant had indulged in betting, and he was fined £2, costs 19s, witnesses' expenses £3>-and counsel's fee £2 2s. In his decision on Tuesday Major Keddell took a diametrically opposite view, dismissing the case on the ground that the by-law was unreasonable.