MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, 3 September 1920, Page 6

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

NEW PLYMOUTH SITTING. THEFT CASE DISMISSED. A plea of not guilty was made by A. C. Fox at the New Plymouth Magistrate's Court yesterday, in answer to a charge of stealing an overcoat valued lit £B, the property of Frank Griffiths, on May 8, between Palmerston North and New Plymouth. Frank Griffiths, fitter, said that on May 8 he was a passenger from Palmereton North. His luggage consisted of a portmanteau, with an overcoat strapped on it, and he checked it through to New Plymouth. On going to claim the luggage the coat was missing, and the railway authorities informed the police. He saw his coat again last Saturday, when Fox was wearing it. He informed the police, and on Monday he ivent to the railway station accompanied by Constable Parkinson and saw Fox on the arrival of the train v The defendant was questioned 'by the constable, and he said someone on" the train offered him the coat, on condition that he paid that person's fare from Hawera. Mr. Bennett said the case for the defence was that there was no evidence that Fox stole the coat. No doubt someone had stolen it; the fact that Fox had the coat in'his possession, of course, made him accountable for how he got it. Counsel said it was a common occurrence for defendant to be approached on the train for loans of various sums of money. On a certain date he was in the Railway Hotel, Hawera, when he Was accosted and asked by a man for a loan of 5s to pay his fare to New Plymouth. Fox ultimately agreed to the request, and reluctantly took the «oat as security.' The case was dismissed, the coat to he returned to the owner. LIQUOR IN A PROHIBITED AREA. M. O'Halloran, of Tongaporutu, was charged with committing a breach of the Licensing Act, by taking into Tongaporutu, which was within a no-license area, 2J bottles of whisky, without a statement in writing of the nature and quantity of the liquor and the name and ad-. dress of the person to whom it was being sent, securely attached to the outside of the bag containing the liquor. Mr. R. H. Quilliam appeared for defendant ' and entered a plea of not guilty. Constable Blaikie gave evidence that lie was riding in ' the coach with de-' fpndant, and before entering the nolicense area warned him of the requirements of the Act. A number of passen-. gers on the coach had drinks at defendant's invitation, but witness declined. Mr. Quilliam contended that the provisions of the Act relating to the carriage of liquor did not apjly if a man was personally taking it in for his own consumption. In this case there was no concealment, and the liquor was for defendant's own use. His Worship upheld counsel's contention, remarking that the object of the Act was evidently to get a record of the people to whom liquor was sent. The case was dismissed. A QUESTION OF COSTS. Reserved decision was given in connection with the costs in the case of Johnson v. Hale, in which profiteering was alleged. His Worship said that while Johnson was the informant, and actually laid the information, it.was at the instigation of the Board of Trade.' The proceedings were taken by an officer of the Board, r and it was therefore a Crown case. Reviewing the general practice in the matter of costs, he said it was not usual to allow costs on the dismissal of a case laid on behalf of the Crown or a public body, and in the public interest it was right that this should be the rule. The Board, however, was specially constituted, having very arbitrary powers giving them the right to make exhaustive investigations. The prosecutions arose as the result,of an advertisement in a newspaper to the effect that milkvendore were raising the price one penny per quart. This was reported to the Board by the local representative. Apparently there were no inquiries prior to | the institution of proceedings; had there been, the rate of profit would have been found to be other than was calculated. In fact, the Board seemed to have used the Court for the purpose of making the investigation. In the circumstances it was not equitable that the whole of the costs should be borne by Hale. Costs would be awarded against "the informant. The adjustment of costs was left to counsel engaged, Mr. Quilliam for defendant, and Mr. Billing for informant.