CHRISTCHURCH.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 7721, 2 June 1903, Page 3

CHRISTCHURCH.

Tt/ESDAT, JUNK 2. (Before Mr W. R. Haselden, S.M.) Drttnicen t nicßS. — Annie FraSef) cliarffed with uuing an habitual drunkard, sighii3e-d her readiness tt> enfer the Samaritan Home for three months, and his Worship ordered her to come up for sentencs When culled upon.— Alexander Bailantyne, charged with having been dniflk while in charge of a horse cart, was fined ss"' and costs. — One . male fil-st offender was iined 5s and costs, in default twenty-four hours' imprisonment, and two others, who did not appear, were tittcli fined 7s and coats, in default twenty-four hours' imprisonment; Ir.LEGAi.L'i' os- Premises.'— William Henry 6cotc, charged with having been found by. nigiit, without. lawM exoui-e, on the new premises of the Bank of Australasia- in Cashel Street, pleaded cbunkenttess as an excuse, and ttsked for leniency, as his intentions were quite honest. He had merely entered th£ premises to lie down. There was nothing previously known against the accused* who was discharged-. A Bic.YGt.lt Tttifcr.— Alfred Hoskins Dunein was charged with having, on April 20, at Dunedln, stolen a bicycle, value £22 10s, the pro-pert}- of Messrs Best and Towne. Mr Donnelly, who appeared for the accused, said that tt plea of guilty woxtld ba entered, and he asked that the police should reduce the value oi..tla.e bicycle to £20 to enable hiss Worship to deal with the case summarily. This waa agreed to, and his Worship theit remanded 'the accused for the report of ths Probation Officer. ■ Aftkb Hoirnfe.— William Kennedy and Alexander. Bullatltyue, two young meti, guilty to >i charge that, having been foiiild on tho" licensed pre-mises of the Phconix Hotel after lice-nsed hours, they gave wrong names to a police officer. SubInspector Dwyci 1 said the case arose out of a. prosecution which occurred some time baok, in which tho licensee o£ the Phoenix Hotel bad been proceeded against for serving these two defendant*, who were •not bona lid© travellers, with liquor on Sunday evoking. The defendants had b&en sub* ptßnaed, and had given evidence under an assumed' name, and. in consequeaoQ of thia discovery, proceedings had' been taken. Tho defendants pleaded guilty, and -Were each fined 20s and costs. A Bookmaker FiS'fiD. — John Randall, a bookmaker, pleaded guilty \to a charge of having transacted the business of a bookmaker in a public street of the city. SubInspector Dwyer explained thafr*ft few days back tho defendant hfld 'been charged with laying totalizator odds, and he had miocsssftllly pleaded that it Was a straight* out bet made In the street in' front of an hotel. This itself being an offence, he was now charged .with his own admission aa evidence. The defendant Was fined 40s and costs. The Stock Regulations. — John Breeze, a pig-farmer at Bromley {Mr Joynt) pleaded not guilty to a charge of having fed swine upon unboiled offal. Mr Stringer, who appeared for the inspector of Stock, said that under the Slaughtering Act of 1900* it was unlawful to feed pigs upon meat or offal unless It had' been first boiled. .The evidence for tie prosecution was that the defendant had purchased large quantities of pigs' offal, and a visit being made to his place, pieces of offal were found within reach of the switte. The presumption was that the swine had 'been fed on the material. In defence it was denied that the offal had been fed raw to the pigs. There were about two . hundred fowls on the farm, and the pluck!?, livers and other useful parts of the offal were boiled and fed to these birds. The remaining offal was buried. His Honor said he thought a Warning Was all that was required in this case. He could not See his Way to inflict | a v crush,ing fine of £50, but, Seeing that solicitors had been employed", he. thought that a nominal fine of 208 and costs, to act as a ■warning, would meet the. case. Trespassing ox the >. Racecotjbse. — T. Butler- (Mr Cassidy) pleaded not guilty to a charge of having trespassed on the grounds of the New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club at Addington on April 15, and refused to leave when requested to do so. The defence was, first, that the officials who ordered the defendant off the ground were not properly authorised, and, second, that the defendant had left within a reasonable time after being ordered off by the authorised officials of the club. Sis Worship said that if it had been an offencd for the defendant to enter the course at all it would put the case on a different footing. He had been there lawfully and ' remained lawfully until he was ordered _gff . He had left within twenty minutes, which he thought to be a reasonable . time. The case would be dismissed. A Test Case. — John Cooper, the licensee of the Papanui Hotel, pleaded not guilty to a charge of having sold milk taken from an unregistered dairy. Mr Stringer appeared for Mr A. Macpherson, Inspector'of Dairies, arid, the defendant was unrepresented. Mr Stringer said that the case had been brought with the view of testing a question not yet decided under the Dairy . Act and regulations thereunder. The defendant was an hotelkeeper at P-spanui, and he kept a cow, the milk from which he supplied to his customers. Boarding-house keepers who kept their own dairies had to register them, and there was practically no difference in principle between the case of boarding-house keepers and the case of the defendant. Evidence was given by Alexander Macpherson, Dairy Inspector. The defendant, in reply, said that he did not sell the milk> It was ther« for his cus--tomers, and those who asked for whisky and miik were charged no more than if they had taken whisky and water. They could take 'it or not, as they liked, and with regard to possible germs, everyone in the Court must know that whisky in milk was absolutely fatal to them. (Laughter.) If his boarders did not wish for milk in their tea or food they need not take it, but the. price was the same. Mr Haselden reserved his decision. Maintenance. — David M'Ewan was charged with being in arrears with his payments on a maintenance order. He vwas sentenced to one month's imprisonment, the warrant to b© suspended for fourteen days., — Leonard Edward Tompkins, charged with\ being £10 in arrears in his payments on a maintenance order, was ordered to pay at the rate of 10s per week regularly.