LYTTELTON.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 443, 15 October 1869, Page 3

LYTTELTON.

(Before W. Donald, Esq., R.M., and F. D. Gibson, Esq.") Bbeacii of the Hahboor and Quarantine Kegulations. — John Albert Morgan was charged with this offence. Mr Nalder appeared for the defence. Charles Ward sworn, said : lam Tide Surveyor of H. M. Customs. The Maori arrived on Wednesday afternoon ; she did not anchor, but waited off Officer's point for information as to where the powder on board should be landed. Capt. Gibson, Port Officer, had ordered pilot Norria to go on board for that purpose. I went out in my official capacity, and waited in my boat until ,the vessel had come to an anchorage. On arriving alongside of the steamer I found some watermen's boats there, and Mr Morgan and G. Messiter on board. By Mr Nalder : I do not know where Mr Morgan's permit from Customs is ; it was only to land the powder, not to go on board. Mr Nnlder asked for an adjournment of the case, until the permit was produced. It was issued by the Customs. W. Mills, Collector, said he had received notice to produce a permit, but he knew nothing of it. Mr Ward explained to the Court that the permit was merely to land powder into the magazine. Cross-examination continued : Mr Morgan did come into the Custom House, and said there was powder on board. This was why a permit was given. It was a few minutes before the vessel came round the point. He said the vessel was coming up the harbour. He asked if he could go off in the Customs boat, and was told that he could. Could not say how long it was after the vessel was in before ths Customs boat went off; might have been a few minutes ; considered that when the Customs boat went alongside the vessel was anchored ; did not look to see if she was so; she had stopped. The pilot makes hi* own arrangements ; he can go on board ; he went off. I saw him go. Ido not know that defendant went with him. W. Mills, Collector of Customs, said : I did not know that application was made to land

powder. I was not in the office at the time. Thomas Watson, licensed boatman, said : I took off Mr Norris, pilot, and defendant. They went on board. The vessel went up harbour to the magazine ; she did not anchor. The Custom House boat soon came alongside. Captain Gibson, Port officer, said defendant applied for permission to land powder at the magazine. Mr Noiris, pilot, went off to the vessel. The defend mt made the following statement : — I received a telegram from Captain Malcolm, stating that he had powder on board. I saw Captain Gibson on the subject, and also went to the Custom House. I asked if I might go in the Customs boat, and they said yes. Ttie collector was present in the office. I afterwards saw the pilot, and as the pilot boat was not launched, I asked him to go off with me. I went on board after the pilot, who was acting as health officer. Mr Nalder addressed the bench, and said it was not a case that came within the meaning of the Act. There had been no intended breach of the regulations. Mr Norris, pilot, examined, said : He took defendant off in his boat. Defendant went on board first; he followed him. The Bench said there was no doubt the law had been infringed. Certain parties had been summoned, and the press had publicly uoticed these proceedings, the question was for mitigation of penalty. Geroge Messiter, licensed waterman, was charged with the same offence. The defendant did not deny the charge, but said he was the mail carrier, and it was his duty to go on board as soon as a vessel came in, and get her mails, and forward them without delay. He saw the pilot on board ; complaints had been made respecting mails being detained. A few minutes would innke a difference of two hours, if he had to wait for the Customs boat. Very often it did not go off for a long time after the vessel was in. and this delay would cause several hours detention of the mails. The Bench said this was a matter which the Post-office and Customs must arrange between them. As defendant had — seeing the pilot was on board —gone on board in ignorance, the fine would be a nominal one of Is and costs. Mr Morgan, would be fined iv the mitigated penalty of 10s and costs.