BOROUGH BY-LAWS.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLVII, Issue 15639, 5 October 1921, Page 5

BOROUGH BY-LAWS.

- FINES .FOR; BREACHES. A number of .charges under the borough by-laws were’dealt, with at the Magistrate’s Court to-day, before 'Mr. ~T. S. Barton, S.M., as a result of the activities of, the police' officials. A young- man, Gordon Black, was charged, that, on September 26 he did ride a bicycle on the footpath of Wainni road. A similar charge was laid against Albert a voluntary appearance was made by Lewis Moiser, who appeared on a charge, of riding, a bicycle on the footpath Gif. Customhouse street. Moiser’s case was taken first, the defendant pleading guilty. He stated that, to* was 16 years of age, and was just starting work. He was convicted. Albert Nicholls pleaded guilty, and said that he had nothing to say. He was also convicted. A plea of guilty was also entered by Gordon Black. , His Worship, dealing with the penalties, said that the offences followed upon a series of warnings given some time ago. The lad Moiser would he fined 10s and costs 7s, and each of the other two would be fined £1 and costs 7s. ’ . ' ,■ . ’ Under the Tramways Act, the police took action against- Alfred Baty, on two counts, first, with having, on September' 17, refused to leave the platform of a tram car when requested to do so by the conductor, and, second, with having obstructed the conductor employed on the tram in the performance of his duty.— Defendant pleaded guilty to both charges; Senior-Sergeant Fitzpatrick stated that the offences occurred when defendant boarded an outgoing tram, find re-, fused to move off the platform. Tie thus obstructed the people going on and oft the tram, and also the conductor. The defendant, was apparently slightly under tlie influence of drink at the time.. It was regretted that a' hardworking citizen such as the. defendant should have to be brought before the Court on such a charge. Mr. Leech, tramways manager, stated to, his Worship that the proceedings were brought merely 'as a warning to others. It was not desired that a heavy penalty be imposed, hut merely that the public convenience should bo protected. His Worship remarked that he had already marked down a fine of £l, hut ni deference to the remarks of Mr. Leech, he now s;nv fit to reduce- it to 10s. The defendant- would, on the first count, he convicted and fined the amount' indicated, with costs amounting to 11s. His Worship suggested that, as the two charges arose from one offence, the second should lie withdrawn on payment of the costs, 7s.—Senior-Sergeant Fitzpatrick agreed to the suggestion. A default of two days’ imprisonment was fixed in respect of the fine.