RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

West Coast Times, Issue 690, 10 December 1867, Page 4

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before G. G. Fitzgerald, Esq., E.M.) Monday. Decembee 9. Dbunk and Disobdebly. — James Challis and Richard Reeves were each fined 10s, with the alternative of twentyfour hours imprisonment in default of payment. Dbunk and Disobdebly. — James Douglas was fined Ll, with the usual alternative. He was then charged with the wilful destruction of property of the value of L 3 10s. Mr Lynch of M'Guire and Lynch, stated that the prisoner came into his hotel (the Swan Hotel) and asked for change of two notes for gold. A sovereign, half sovereign, and ten shillings were handed him, which he refused to accept and left the house. He was at the time under the influence of liquor. He shortly afterwards returned, and the door being closed to keep him out he drove his fist through the window. His Worship fined him Ll and ordered him to pay L 3 10 for the property destroyed, or in default of payment to be imprisoned for seven days. Sheep Stealing. — John Penny and James Smith were charged, on the information of constable Bennett, with, on the second ult.,stealingasheep from Rangiriri, the property of Charles Mullins. At the request of the police the prisoners were remanded to the 10th inst. Bail to be taken, the prisoners in LSO each, with two sureties in L 25 each. Desebtion. — Henry Hopkinson was charged on the information of Susannah Hopkinson with deserting her and their three children. The police had not succeeded in serving the summons upon the defendant. The case was accordingly adjourned till the 23rd instant. BBEACE OF WEIGHTS AND MEASUBES OBDINANCE. Cobb and Co were charged on the information of Rowland Davis, Inspector of Weights and Measures with, on the 7th instant, having in their office an illegal balance, viz., a dial spring balance. The Inspector stated that he had been sworn under the Ordinance. On the 7th inst., he found the balance in the defendants office. Witness had tested it and found it deficient. The Inspector here asked his Worship to inflict a nominal fine in this as well as other cases that he would bring before him to-day. By the Court — He had not brought the case before the Court because the weights were deficient, simply because the balance was illegal, j The defendant stated that he was not aware that the balance was illegal. It was merely used as a guide. He never charged for goods weighed by it. His Worship remarked that this - sort of balance was clearly illegal under the Ordinance. He would reserve the decision of the Court as to the amount of the fine until the following morning. James Bladier was also charged with having a dial spring-balance and an upright spring-balance in his store. — The defen- , dant denied that the scales were his pro- 1 perty. He merely owned the store. — -His j Worship also adjourned this case till the j following dny, and at the same time informed the inspector that he might call evidence to prove the ownership of the scales.

William Moffat was charged with having in his shop a pair of unstamped steelyards. — Defendant stated that they were only used for weighing carcasses of beef, and then very seldom. — His Worship here asked the inspector whether the operation of "The Weights and Measures Ordinance" had been extended to the town of Hokitika by proclamation of his Excellency the Governor. It would be necessary for the inspector to produce the "Gazette" containing the proclamation before his Worship would inflict a fine in any of these cases. The inspector replied that he was under the impression that the town of Hokitika had been gazetted. He had not seen the proclamation, but he was informed by the authorities at Christchurch that the town of Hokitika had been gazetted. — This ease was also adjourned till the following day. M'Guire and Lynch were charged with having in their house five unstamped pint pots. The defendant stated that the pots were never used as measures. Some people preferred drinking beev out of pewter-pots, that was what they were used for, but not as measures. Adjourned till the following' day. Joseph Alman was charged with having an unstamped yard measure in his store. The Inspector stated that he was in error. It was a tape measure the defendant had in v his store, and not a yard measure. He did not seize it because the law did not recognise tape measures. His Worship remarked that it was all the more reason why he should have seized the tape. Under clause 19, it was necessary that the measure be seized and be brought before the Court. In this case he would have to dismiss the information.

A similar ease brought against George Stewart, in which the Inspector had not seized the measure, was also dismissed.

Samuel Alcorn was also charged with having an unstamped yard measure in his shop. The Inspector stated that the yard wasnot stamped with New Zealand stamp. (The word " yard "*• and the " broad arrow.") Cross-examined by defendant — Government supply witness with standard measures. The defendant stated that his measure bore the Imperial stamp, and he contended that would be sufficient. The Magistrate remarked that it must be stamped under the New Zealand Ordinance. Case adjourned till following day.

Graves and Kellock were also charged with having an unstamped yard measure in their shop. Defendants stated they were not aware there was an Inspector of Weights and Measures in Hokitika. Adjourned till 10th inst.

F. W. Isaacs was charged with having an unstamped yard meagure in his store. Cross-examined by the defendant — The Inspector could not swear positively to the measure produced being the property of the- defendant. He had left it with others at Messrs Mcc and Marks, as he did not wish to parade them through the street, and when he returned the label was off the measure. His Worship stated that as the Inspector could not identify the measure he must dismiss the information.

Informations laid against A. C. Pritchard, O'Leary, White and Pirie, M'Kay, Cosgraveand Co., and A. J. Manson and Co. were also dismissed on the same grounds.

J. F. Byrne and Co. were also charged with having an unstamped goods measure in their- store. In this case the Inspector was able to srjeak positively as to the measure, as he had at once removed it to his office. The defendant stated they had no use for the measure in their business. It was never used. Case adjourned till next day.

The Court was then adjourned till p}\ yen o'clock on the following day.