MAGISTERIAL.

Timaru Herald, Volume L, Issue 4822, 19 April 1890, Page 4

MAGISTERIAL.

TlMAßU— Fbidat, April 18. (Before 0. A. Wray, Ksq., R.M.) UKBEQISTBBBD DOG. G. Talbot was fined 10a for this offence. "~ BAILWAY BY-LAW. J. Hammond was charged with breach of railway by-law No. 22 by plying for hire on the railway premises, without license from the General Manager. This case was further adjourned for three weeks. HCBKSISa LAW. A. O. Gilmour, Fairlie Creek, was chargad with unlawfully noglecting to keep alight the lamp affixed over the door of hij licensed premises, between 1.10 and 8 a.m. on March 29th. Sergeant Major Mason prosecuted, and Mr Raymond for defendant pleaded not guilty. Constable Billiard stated that it having been reported to him that defendant was neglecting to keep his light burning, he looked out for it, and on four successive nights, 16th ti> the 19th March, saw tho lamp did not burn all night. On the 29th he was out again and saw tho light go out a little after 1 a.m. Did not tell defendant after the four nights, but reported to his superiors. The next day after the 29th, told defendant about the lamp, and a Buromons was issued. Had told him previously to the 16th that his lamp was not burning all night. Sometimes a candle wss put m the lantern, and defendant must know perfectly well a candle would not last all night. His Worship toid witness that if he saw a publican's light going out, he should not endeavour to catch him, m order to convict him of an offence, but Bhould tell him of it so that he could remedy the defect. The law was only intended to punish wilful neglect. Defendant stated that the lamp was a new one and contained oil enough to burn all night, and he gave instructions to his man to attend to it properly. He could not acconnt for its going out so soon on some nights. In reply to His Worship as to whether there was any ill feeling between him and the constable-, the defendant- said it appeared so as the constable did not care to speak to him m the street ; he did not know the reason. J. Fleming, the man employed to fill the lamp, stated he attended to it properly, and he had proved that it would burn from 6 p.m. to 11 a.m. His Worship said he thought it would be better if tho police had told the defendant first and given him a chance to put right anyMr Mason : It is not his duty to do that ; his duty is to report to headquarters. His Worship said he was only speaking from the common sense point of view. It would be better to tell a man " your lamp does not burn all night, you must put it right or I Bhall have to report you." The neglect did not appear to have been wilful, there must be something wrong with the lamp, and defendant had better see to it. The case would be dismissed, with a caution. , Mr Mason asked for the constable's expends, but His Worship declined to allow them. ___^_______^