MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Te Awamutu Courier, Volume 54, Issue 3892, 21 April 1937, Page 7

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

SITTING AT TE AWAMUTU. CHARGES DEALT WITH. Mr F. H. Levien, S.M., presided at the monthly sitting of the Magistrate’s Court, held at Te Awamutu to-day. STOCK PROSECUTIONS. The stock inspector, Mr G. B. Melrose, proceeded against Alexander Laskey for exposing lice-infected sheep for sale at the Te Awamutu sale yards.—A fine of 20s and costs (12s) was imposed. On a similar charge Donald V. Baxter, who had 175 sheep for sale, was fined 40s and costs (12s).

Arthur W. Dormer, who had 156 lice-infected sheep for sale, was fined 30s and costs (12s).

George O. Bayley, charged with having 245 lice-infected sheep for sale, was fined 50s and costs (12s). Arthur Smith, a dealer, of Otorohanga, also was charged with exposing lice-infected sheep for sale, and was fined 40s and costs (12s). Bruce McKenzie, who had 72 liceinfected sheep for sale, was fined 30s and costs (12s). THEFT OF A TURKEY. Harold Sherley and Tom Aikmen were charged with the theft on 31st March of a turkey valued at 10s, the property of W. F. Woodward. A lorry driver stated that he saw one of the defendants shoot the turkey and the other taking it, the defendants seeing no house at hand or any others in the vicinity. They were on a shooting expedition at Pukeatua when the incident occurred. Both defendants pleaded guilty to the charge. The magistrate said they had lost their sense of resonsibiiity. Both were convicted and fined 50s and costs (12s). BREACH OF FINANCE ACT. Under the Shops and Offices Act the inspector of factories, J. Mclvor, charged Mrs C. E. Wolfe for failure to keep a time and wages book. It was alleged that the award wages had not been paid, and one of the workers had not received a full day’s holiday. Mr V. A. de Coek, for defendant, pleaded guilty. The inspector stated that when defendant was visited there was only one worker for 26 boarders. The magistrate stated that it appeared a very bad case, as defendant was trying to run a private hotel with 26 boarders and only one employee. The inspector contended that the Act’s intention was to make for fair competition. He stated that section 16 of the Finance Act applied to all industries where the award expired prior to 1936 but was in force in 1931. It was stated that only those who provided accommodation for more than 16 persons came under the award.

Mr V. A. de Coek, on behalf of defendant, contended that the Shops and Offices Act did not apply to defendant as there must be three employees to come under the award. The amendments to the Finance Act brought her under that Act. Counsel said

that his client had run the private hotel until recently with only one employee. She did not realise that she was bound by the award. He contended that defendant was not a party expressly or implied to the award, and could not therefore be charged for a breach. He said that there was a similar case before the Court at

ts last sitting in Te Awamutu, when :he plaintiff was non-suited. The magistrate stated that section

16 of the Finance Act did not make persons parties to the award, and defe(dant was not a party to the award. Section 16 dealt only with rates of pay. Defendant, on the charge of failing to give the employee a holiday, was fined £5; she was fined £3 and costs on the other counts. FAILURE TO CLOSE PREMISES. Thomas Atkins was charged under the Shops and Offices Act with failing to close his tobacconist shop at 5-30 p.m., the required time. The inspector of factories said the local tobacconists had approached him on the matter. He stated that he had visited the shop on 25th February, and had purchased cigarettes at 8.5 p.m. The notice was gazetted on 22nd February. Defendant, for whom Mr J. A. Tawkins appeared, was convicted and ordered to pay costs.