FINES IMPOSED

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 2, Issue 248, 11 December 1940, Page 5

FINES IMPOSED

BREACHES OF OIL FUEL REGULATIONS FARMER CHARGED Breaches c.f the Oil Fuel Emer gency Regulations, 1939, were admitted by a farmer, Ernest Isaac Cartier, when he appeared before Mr E. L. Walton, in the Magistrate's Court yesterday. Defendant was charged] that on June 28, at Awakeri, he did sell six gallons of oil fuel at the disposal of the Controller 1 , otherwise than in accordance with the permit granted by the Controller. A second charge, that on May 10 at Edgecumbe* having purchased 35 gallons of oil fuel under a consumer's licence, did use it otherwise than for the purpose set out in the application, was also preferred.

Sergeant M. Farrell said defendant was a farmer at Awakeri. He made application to the Oil Fuel Controller for eighteen gallons per month and the permit- was granted solely for farm Avork, for which defendant had stated that he used a certain truck.

Sometime ?a August the Controller received information of irregularities in connection with Cartier's licence and referred the matter to Traffic Inspector Delves for investigation. Inspector Delves had visr ited the afrm but was unable to find the truck. Cartier had informed the Inspector that it Avas on the farm of a man named Paul, to whom he had sold it. It Avas unlikely that the truck Avas in Avorking order Avhen the application for a fuel licence A\'as made and the permit granted. It Avas later ascertained that a man named Kerrison \Vas driving defendant in Karrison's OAvn vehicle. Referring to the charge involving the sale of six gallons Sergeant Farrell said that a contractor named Rogantini delivered a load of battens at defendant's farm, on defendant's order, and when delivery Avas made, Cartier -said he did not Avant the battens. He offered to compensate Rogantini and provided him with an order on the Rangitaiki Dairy Co for six gallons of benzine. This AA r as not supplied. Defendant said that Kerrison had driven him about on business and other matters because his OAvn vehicle Avas not in order. He did no> realise that he had infringed the IaAV.

On the first charge Cartier was fined £2, with £2 8s costs and £3 16s 6d witnesses' expenses, and on the second, £4- and 10s costs.