MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17905, 22 July 1926, Page 4

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

CHRISTCHURCH. (Before Mr 11. A. Young, S.M.) THREE CHARGES. George Henry Conquest, a seaman, 18 years of age. was charged with having stolen at Kaiapoi a ling valued at £2, the property of Alexander M’KenIle was also charged with the theft at Waikari of a lady’s brooch valued at £l, the property of Alexander Allen, and, further, with having failed to comply with the terms of his release on probation. He pleaded not guilty and was remanded to appear on July 28. PROBATION GRANTED. Paterson Alexander Genet, aged 17, appeared on remand on a charge of having wilfully and obscenely exposed himself. Chief-Detective Gibson said the offence had taken place at Opawa. The youth was backward mentally. Mr Twyneham, who appeared for the accused, said Genet had left school eighteen months ago, but had reached only the third standard. He was not deficient mentally, but was mentally dull. lie seemed quite unable to realise that he had done wrong. Counsel did not think it was a case where imprisonment would do any good. The Magistrate suggested that perhaps a period in the Borstal Institute would be an advantage, but Mr Twyneham asked that the parents be given one more chance to look after the boy. He was admitted to probation for three years, a special condition being that he should undergo such medical and surgical treatment as the probation officer might direct. (Before Mr 11. Y. Widdowson, S.M.) CIVIL BUSINESS. UNDEFENDED CASES. Judgment was given for the plaintiffs in the following undefended cases: * Florence and Ethel Shillito v. Edith Emma Pike, £l2 2s 6d; Vacuum Oil Companv Proprietarv v. Cowie and Voss, £3O 3s r»d; T. Rattrav and Son Ltd. v. F. Lewis. £2 16s lOd; Kennaway Estate v. George Fairbaird, £SO; Ashby Be.rgh and Co. v. J. ('reedy. £3 10s; Trade Auxiliarv Cov. v. 1. Sheehan. £1 10s 3d; 11. Gudsell and Coy v. S. Humphreys, £1 9s 6d; New Zealand Express Coy. Ltd. v. T. Beumel berg, £1 3s; Harris Bros Ltd. v. J. S. Hay, £8 4s 7d; The North Canterbury Hospital Board v. G. H. Edwards, £4 14s; Park Davis and Co. v. W. Sturt, £2B 18s sd; Heltnore, Van Asch and Walton v. J. S. Jones, £8 10s 6d; Avonia Distributing Coy. Ltd. v. Carlo Bergamini, £5 10s; same v. G. A. Oakley, £5 19s 6d; Moss Baffin v. F. 11. R. Priest, £7; Jessop and Co. v. Thomas Cherry, £l4 9s 7d; Rink Taxis Ltd. v. J. J. I'ox, £1 2s; F. Spencer v. Ernest. Ivan Paine, £l3 0s 8d: Steel Bros v. W. A. Painter—D’Oridant, £7 13s; New Zealand Tire and Rubber Co. v. Orr Bros. £B9 Gs 9d; same v. R. Climo, £2 19s sd; North Canterbury Hospital Board v. T. Montague, £6 16s Gd; The Guardian Assurance Co. v. J. P. Hogan, £6 ss; H. L. Nicholls v. H. Wilson, £3; Hurst and Drake v. E. Coffins. £5 6s 3d; La Gloria Gramophones v. M. M’Sherrv. £l3; F. 11. Steel Ltd. v. "V. H. v** £ll 11s 7d; same v. E. W. Blair, £3 4s 9d; George Forsyth v. Elizabeth lane Wickes, £l3 12s; The C.D.C. v. Walter Alexander White and Mary White, £8 12s 6d; The Public Trustee v. Erie C. Courtney, £6 7s Id.

JUDGMENT SUMMONS. S. Pearson was ordered to pav Tack Suckling Ltd. the sum of £1 2s in default two days’ imprisonment. AWARD BREACHES. Ilarry ( harman, plasterer, was fined £2 for employing more than the miniher of apprentices allowed by the Canterbury Blusterers’ Apprenticeship order. He was find a further £1 for cmploying an apprentice, without having first obtained the approval of the Apprenticeship Committee. nonsuited. ihe British I raders’ Insurance Company, Ltd. (Mr Tracy) claimed from C. G. Stevenson, salesman of Rangiora (Mr K. M. (Lesson), the sum of £4 11s Gd, the amount alleged to be due as premium on an accident insurance polTlie point in dispute was whether the defendant had renewed his policy or The plaintiff was nonsuited, with