MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Southland Times, Issue 19357, 24 September 1924, Page 10

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

SITTING AT WINTON. POLICE AND CIVIL CASTS. (From Our Correspondent.) The monthly sitting of the Magistrate’s Court was held at Winton yesterday before Mr J. G. L. Hewitt, S.M. CIVIL CASES. Judgment was given for plaintiff in the following cases:—R. Jamieson and Sons v. Thomas Kincaid, £99 0/9, costs £6 16/-, and E. M. Raines v. J. A. Robertson, £9 12/6, costs £2 11/6. The Truant Officer proceeded against D. M. Chisholm as guardian of a child who had not attended school regularly at Springhills. Defendant was fined 2/- and costs 7/- bn each of four informations, and ordered to pay witness’s expenses, 12/-. A similar charge was made against D. Corkery, whose child had failed to attend school regularly at Limehills. Defendant was fined 5/-, and 7/- costs. ACTION FAILS IN MOTOR CASE. B. Clearwater was charged with, on August 3, failing to allow sufficient space on the Oreti Road for a car owned and driven by Thomas S. Smith to pass. Thomas S. Smith, farmer, Oreti, said that on the day in question he was coming in to church at Winton. His wife and daughter were in the car with him. He came down a side road and the defendant’s lorry passed along the main road when he was a chain or two from it. He overtook the lorry almost immediately after he gained the main road. He endeavoured to pass the lorry three or four times, but each time the lorry blocked him by crossing to the right side of the road. He was forced to keep behind the lorry for about a mile. When he did manage to pass he had to go right out on the grass. The lorry was loaded with men. He blew his horn, but the driver of the lorry, which was a closed one, took no notice. He did not know if the driver of the lorry heard him. The road was very wide where this took place. He had driven a car for about seven years. Mrs E. J. Smith and Miss D. M. Smith gave evidence of a similar nature.» Constable Kerse said that on August 29 he inspected the road in question, there being 21 feet width of gravel road. The road was slightly narrower about one-half chain from the Oreti River bridge. He had ravelled this road scores of times, and uund it to be the best piece of road in uuthland. Mr PoppelwelJ, who appeared for the defendant, cross-examined the witnesses, and stated that by the Public Works Act, under which the action was brought, the iriver of a vehicle was the responsible party, and that this action had been wrought against the owner of tht, lorry. M evidence had been brought by the prosecution to show that the owner was ehe driver of the lorry. He contended .neretore that the case should be dismissed.

lhe Magistrate supported Mr Poppelwell’s ■ontention and dismissed the case.