COUNTY CRITIC

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 9, Issue 28, 30 November 1945, Page 5

COUNTY CRITIC

CONDUCT OF TRAFFIC BREACHES PENAL FINES COMPARED Strong criticism of the fact that in ajl tralTic. offences laid by the County Council, defendants were fined 10/- more than was the case under the Transport Department was voiced in a letter to the County Council last week, by Mr 13. F. Grace Taneatua. The writer claim- > ed that the whole position was most unfair and contended that the County Inspector should be capable of pursuing cases in the same way as the Transport Officer, without incurring an additional legal fee. The Chairman pointed out that Inspector Doggett had the benefit of' a legal department behind him, for which there was no charge, whilst County prosecutions had, of necessity, to be backed by a legal opinion and proper formality of presentation. He agreed that it did. seem unfair but pointed out that the only other w ay was lor the Council to meet the extra legal fee. from its own funds which course he was ? .7 sure would not meet with the ratepayers approval. Cr McCready considered the whole thing utterly wrong. Why should it be possible for one offender, when apprehended by the County Inspect tor to pay more by way of a fine tban another, who was stopped by a Transport Officer a few yards Jurther down the road ? It was a very objectionable method, and should be corrected. The County Clerk, in answer to a (fuestion, stated that the Council benefited from lines to the extent of all money's received less five per cent. The County Solicitor's appearance fee was fixed by the Court, and could not be altered.

Cr McCready contended that where all defendants pleaded guilty, as happened in most cases ? he failed to see why money should be paid out in cold blood for practically no services at all. The subject matter of the letter was very much to the pointy and the Council .should do something about it. Cr Hunter: There are only two tilings we can do: either to stop the or to go on as we have been doing in the past. The Chairman commented that it the Inspector were asked to make out his .own summons and legal forms without the assistance of a qualified solicitor, he would be very reluctant, to prosecute at all ( for any mistake on his part f might mean committing the Council to a very substantial penalty. It would be unfair to ask the Inspector to shoulder this responsibility. Cr McCready suggested that a standing fee should be paid annually to the County Solicitor to cover y.ll traffic prosecutions. The Chairman: It would be unfair to expect the ratepayers to shoulder that cost. On the motion of Cr MeGougan. it was decided to refer the matter to the finance committee for the purpose of conferring with both the Inspector and the County Solicitor.