MOSGIEL MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Otago Witness, Issue 3196, 16 June 1915, Page 3

MOSGIEL MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Friday, June 11. (Before Mr H. Y. Widdowson, S.M.)

Mosgiel Borough Council v. John Soutcr. —Claim for rates. —The Defendant applied for a rehearing of this case, which had been disposed of on the previous court day against him.—Mr Allan appeared for the counciland opposed the application.—The Defendant submitted in an affidavit that ha was entitled to a rehearing, as ho had sufficient grounds for defending, and that through being late in attendance at the first hearing he was unable to lay them before the court. — The Magistrate said he would not entertain the second point at all. A time was set down for the court to open, and an excuse that defendant was detained through business would not hold good. Defendant had allowed his business to interfere, and‘ this was trifling with the court —a thing he (the magistrate; would not permit.—ln answer to the magistrate as to what claims he had to succeed, the defendant spoke of the high valuat on placed on his property compared with that across the street, but' the magistrate held that this was not a matter for the court. Objection should have been lodged' before tho Assessment Court at the proper time. Defendant pointed out that such objection had been withheld because of the action of the Borough Council at the time with the valuation officials. The council withdrew its objection on the understanding that a levaluation would be made, but so far this had not been done. Defendant considered that the Act gave the council power to refund half the rates when a building was untenanted for over a period of six months. Tho magistrate held that the sections quoted by defendant did not apply to buildings where the unimproved system of values was in vogue. The valuation was on the land only, no matter what class of building wa» on it, and whether it was tenanted or not. — Counsel for the borough also argued that no matter what shops or offices were occupied or unoccupied, defendant appeared on tho roll as occupier, and he occupied some of the shops. He quoted authorities in support of his contention. —The Magistrate said he did not consider the claims made by defendant warranted a rehearing, and he dismissed the application.—Defendant asked leave to appeal, and the magistrate remarked that he could take whatever course ho thought advisable. The Truant Inspector procerjded agaipst Richard M‘Donald, of Janefield, for not allowing his boy, 13 years of age, to attend school regularly.—ln defence it was statedi that the "boy was working by riding racehorses; also, that part of the time complained of the boy’s eyes had been bad.—< The Magistrate pointed out that education ought to bo availed of. It was probably paying the boy and his father better at present to be doing this work, but it would toll very :uoh against the boy in later years. The bov had only passed the Third Standard. A fine of 10s and court costs (ss) was inflicted.