AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume VI, Issue 620, 23 June 1882, Page 2

AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday, June 20. Before Justin Aylmer, Esq., R.M. BREACH OF DOG HICOISTPvATION ACT. Tne adjourned case against J. Knight, of Laverick's Bay, was first called on. Francis Priest,'sworn, said: I am the registrar of doga in Okain's Bay. The

book produced is the legister. I did not register the dogs in question. They were , •regisfeied by William Pi rest my son, who : is now in the Nouh Island. Sergeant Wi'lis : I beg to call the Court's attention to the register book . entiiee. The Bench lead the entries referred to from the book, ftom which it appeared on the blocks that a man named Moffat had registered a dog on the 4th ; next in order came an entry nn account of Knight, dated the sth, and this was followed by two other ent.ies on behalf of Knight, I both of which weie dated on the 4th, or the day befoie the previous entry. The following entry was on the 19th. The Bench : Very strange. Sergeant Willis: I beg to call your Worship's attention to the color of the dog. The dog is black and tan, and is marked in the register as May sth. and yet the receipt is dated May 4th. All thiee receipts are dated May 4th, though one of the entries in the book is May sth. Defendant said that when he received the receipts he never looked at them. He did not know exactly when he registered the dog in question, for he had paid little attention. He and the sergeant often chaffed each other, and he thought they were doing so ou the occasion in piesiion. The sergeant: I should be perfectly sa,'isfied if Mr Knight goes into the box and swears the dog was legistered on the 4th. The Magistrate: Will you go into the box and swear this ? Mr Knight: No, I will not take my oath what day the dog was registered. I did not know at the time I was chaffing the sergeant that the dog was registered. The Magistrate ; Why, how can that be? Defendant: In oul-of-the-way places we often give people money to register a dog tor us, but do not know whether they have done so of not for a day or two afterwards. The Bench considered the o (fence proved, and fined defendant 40s and costs, making, with witnesses'expenses, £4 in all. ILLEGAL SALE OF LIQUOR AT PIGEON BAY. Henry Firmiston, who keeps the refreshment rooms at Pigeon Bay, was charged with illegally selling liquor on May 25th. Mr Nalder appeared for the defendant. James Pitcaithly, sworn, said : I remember May 25th last. I was in defendant's refreshment room on that day. I had both to eat and drink. I had beer. I had one glass. I had more; it may have been two or three or four. I do not know how many. There were others there. Mr Lissiman was there. I believe there were others having drink, but I did not notice. I did not pay defendant then or since, and saw no one else pay. I simply paid Mr Firmiston a friendly visit. I did not pay him for my dinner, nor did Lissiman. We were old friends, and the others who had beer were friends also. I could not swear who supplied us with beer. I went there to pay Mr Firmiston a friendly visit, {j I did not go by invitation. It was not rfiy intention to get my dinner and some beier there. I do not know if drink can be got ihere. I do not know how many were there. I h ;d business at the beach that morning. I went to open the school for Mr McGregor to hold the licensing poll, and seeing my old friend Mr Lissiman, we went lo Mr Firmiston's, who is also an oid friend, and had dinner there together, not as customers, but friends. > By Mr Nalder: I am a loyal subject to the Queen, and we were celebrating Her Majesty's Birthday. I went from my house to open the school for the poll. I paid nothing, and nothing was booked to me. I never intended to pay. Do not know how many there were in the family party. Consider the party as a celebration of the Queen's Birthday, as there were people from Lyttelton who had comedown there to celebrate that, occasion. By the Bench: The date wis the 25th, and not the Queen's Bhthday. By police: I do not recollect who was present besides Lissiman. When I go to a friendly paity I do not take notice of every one there. By Mr Nalder : There is no public-house near. The sea is the only place to get a drink, I have never seen any spirits sold there. It was purely a family party. William Lyall, sen., sworn, said : 1 remember the 25th of May. I was down on the Pigeon Bay beach th it day, and was in defendant's house, but only for a minute. I had a drink that morning. It* was a drink of whiskey. I did not have ( the drink in the house, but just outside. I did not get the bottle from Mr Firmiston but from Mr T. Brooks, who had had a bottle there the day before. I had something afterwards. That was whiskey too. Young Brooks - gave me that out of a tumbler. I got that drink inside the refreshment rooms. .. They were the only two drinks 1 had. The drink with Mr T. Biooks I had outside, and the one from his son inside. Neither defendant nor his wife supplied rae with beer that day. I stopped after Brooks left, but had no drink after. H. Firmiston, the defendant, deposed that on the day in question there were several people at his refreshment rooms. They were either his friends in the Bay or people from Lyttelton that he knew, who had come from port on the Queen's Birthday, and were stopping with him till the boat returned ou the following day. He had never sold or intended to sell any liquor that day, and had taken no money. Mr Brooks had had a license there the day before, and when he came to pack up he gave those who were helping a drink. He , had a little beer left, which he gave away to witness. Never sold or intended to sell any beer on that day. Had resided in Pigeon Bay twenty years. By Sergeant Willis: Pitcaithly and Lissiman had been in my house that day, and so had my son-in-law. They were the only three. All the beer in the house was what Brooks gave me. Did not sell kegs of beer or beer or refreshments that day, I was just clearing up. It is not a fact I keep beer regularly. It is not true I sell a biscuit and give a glass of beer with it. I do give people the option of hiving either tea or beer with their dinner. If they prefer beer with their dinner I give it to them. I never sell beer ; I only give it with the dinner. This concluded the evidence. The police asked for a conviction under that part of clause 170 running as follows:— " In proving the sale or consumption of liquor for the purpose of any proceeding relative to any offence under this Act, ie shall not bo .necessary to show that any money actually passed or any liquor was actually consumed, if the Court bearing the case be satisfied that a transaction in the nature o: a sale actually took place,

or ibac aoy consump ion of liquor was about to take place." .•Mr Nalder said that he left the case in the hands of the Bsncn. The le'eshmern looms w eio in an isoJa.ed place, and tueio was no means of get.'.•>«■ any refreshments eleewhce. Ie seemed to bun to have been nie.ely a Aleco'v meeting. The Bench said that the penalties under clause 159 of the Licensing Act were very heavy. For the inst offence, like the present, the penalty was up to £50, or a term of impmomnent not exceeding one month. He quite recognised the fact that an ho.el was badly wanted in Pigeon Bay. iltwasapopulousdist.ict, and if a good bote we.c opened there, he believed it ■would be a puolio benefit. At the same inne !t was clear to the Bench that the aw had been violated, and they saw ou lookjng over their leeords that ilr Firmiston had been fined for a smn'lar offence on a previous occasion. The veiy light line ot £10 would be inflicted. Defendant asked for time to pay the fine and was allowed till July 5. The witnesses expenses were disallowed. The Court then adjourned.