BOROUGH BY-LAWS

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIC, Issue 13644, 11 July 1908, Page 7

BOROUGH BY-LAWS

A SERIES OF CHARGES.

■At the Magistrates Court yesterday, before Mr - --V. Wray, fi.M., loui eates of breaches of tlie Borough By-laws were heard; Sergeant Bowman appeared tor the police. ' \ , • A DRAPER'S iSIGX.

Thomas 'lhomson wan charged under section 143 ol tlie by-laws wall hanging a. -calico hadwrtosemciit along tlie posts of. the -verandah. ~in front ot his shop in .Stafford .Street. ' He pleaded not. guil.y. Constable McLean suited that on duly 7th, at about. 2,50 p.m., he saw a long piece of calico wtrh an advertisement upon it, extending from one end of the verandah to' the o'ttor, He to.d. defendant, that this was a breach a{ the by-law and .hat people were complaining about the practice. - At 4-45 p.m. t.l»e sign, was utill there. v JIe' had ascertained that defendant had not obtained ■ pemu.vsion from, the Town Clerk to hang up the Sign. ■■■ >. - Sergeant Bowmon said that during the past 8 or 9 month's the police had warped other shopkeepers; hup this was the. first prosecution, though there had been others tor hanging blankets to verandah pose in-front of drapers shops. 'I he . suspending of i.un blinds was also a contravention of the by-law, ■. Defendant, did not deny that the ad vvertisement was hanging in front of Ins 'shop, bur stated that it Tyas- 8£ feet- from the ground. To thik> His Worship replied that, according to the by-lftW, the height of the advertisement from the ground did . not make any difference. - Continuing; defend-ni: said that in view of the height of the sign from the groundthe prosecution wap.;preposferqus. •He quoted from a newspaper an flpeount j of a Dunedjn case winch occurred recently, which case was brought under sec ion 354 of the Municipal Corporations Act. His Worship pointed out that the present prot-eeutaon was brought under the /I'imaru Borough by-law and not' under the Municipal Corporations Act, and the Ditriedin case had no bearing upon/ this one, which seemed to him to be a clear infringement of Ihe l^y-la^. ' Defendant ren}arke(| that, cpuld piention at least t|iree shopkeepers' who were offending 3t present )n the eam§ direction as he had clone.

To' His Woitihip : When the core able fn\st spoke to him he did not remove the sign because he was busy and hadvarioiit other matters to attend to.

To Sergeant. Bowman: He could not remember having l}een warned fpp • a winihir offence ' seven agoHjs Worship concluded that the matter did not appear to lie yt-ry serious, but still there had Been a dear infraction of t(io by-tow. As i his was the first ease

;of tk kmil in-Timavu he would make the fine 5s and costs: ; V; ; ■ . DANGEROUS CYCLING HABIT. I.eo Albert was charged with riding a cycle without'holding on to , the handle bar. , , : It was stated that, on July 3rd, he rode down the ■ Stafford Street hill: and turned the corner into George Street towards the railway station, while at the time he had hie hands in- his pockets and . had little if, any control over the; ma■chine. The practice was-'a very dangerous one and' ah accident might easily occur. . Defendant, while pleading guilty, stated that lie "did not know he had Committed a breach of the by-law. ' He was cautioned and discharged. CYCLING; WITHOUT LIGHTS. A boy named Eonseca, a draper's messenger boy, was charged witli cycling after sunset 'without, a light. His Worship remarked that, boys were very careless in this respect, and to impress - this case on defendant's mepiory he inflicted a line of Is. ' DRIVING WITHOUT LIGHTS. Robert Binning, for. driving a vehicle after sunset without. lights was fined 5b and costs. ; •