MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Wairarapa Age, 17 March 1925, Page 6

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

CARTERTON SITTING'.

(‘‘The Age’’ Special.)

In the Magistrate's Court at Carterton yesterday before Mr S. L. P. Free, S.M., judgment by default was given 'n the following debt eases: H. Hawtin v. C. H. Con, claim £23 11/6, costs £4 11/; J. C. Ttuin v. J. Johnston £2 15/ (£1 3/); J. C. Truin v. C. Fletcher, £2 10/ (£1 12/); A. H. Kra-. hagen v. Harold Tocker, £l3 1/ (£1 »/)• .- On judgment summons Harold Tocker was ordered to pay ’ JET, A. Evans £3B 13/ forthwith; in default one month's imprisonment. Ivan /(plin and Trevor W. Feastfor riding cycles at night without lights, were each fined 10/ and 17 costs. Robert A. Gray, for failing to register for military training, was fined £1 and 11/ costs. E. W. Perry for using an oil engine without a certificate, was fined £1 and 17/ costs. A Serious Charge. Walter T. Douglas was charged with being drunk while in charge of a motor car. His Worship pointed out that th® charge was a serious one, and many Magistrates were imposing a term of imprisonment for such offences, without tho option of a fine. Defendant would be convicted aiid fined £lO with 10/ costs. Babbits and Sheep. . The rabbit nuisance was respon- ‘ sible for the appearance of two property owners, J. A. Patrick and J. M. WU, who were each fined £5 and 7/ costs. As the result of an inspection of sheep at various saleyards in South Wairarapa a number of farmers were charged with exposing sheep for sale affected with lice. F. Judd was fined £3 and costs; R. Kelly and K. McLaren £2 each and costs; and J. A. Ordish £1 and costs. Licensed Premises.

A plea of guilty was entered by Ernest A. Lovell, charged with being on licensed premises during the currency of a prohibition order. There were two informations, a fine of £1 being entered in each, with costs 7/. The Factory Act. A fine of £1 and 7/ costs was imposed upon tho Wairarapa Brick and Drainpipe Company, Ltd., for failing to notify the Inspector of Factories of an accident in the factory within 48 hours as required by law. The defence was that the accident was of a trivial nature, (an employee injuring a finger) and the secretary to the company was not aware that it was necessary to notify the Inspector.