MAGISTERIAL

Press, Volume LVI, Issue 16855, 8 June 1920, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL

(Beforo Mr S. E. McCarthy, S.M.) UKOTK-E^sNESS. Thomas Stevens was remanded till to-day. : Eva Salt and Victor Plihon were each fined 20s in default 24 hours' imprisonment. Jo-nn . Walsh, alias Vefeh, and a statutory first ■ offender -were each fined '-03, in default < . days' imprisonment. David Alexander Dwies ; wu\ convictcd and discharged for drunken- - niss and fined 10s, and ordered to pay tbe damage, £S 3 , in default 7 days' imprisonment, tor wilfully damaging a car, the property o£ the Polico Dcpartmen.. ALLEGED .. THREATENING BEHAVIOUR. Jack Johnstone and William Byrne were chaigcd with using threatening behaviour in 3 Hereford street, whereby a breach of tne 9 peace was occasioned. The against 8 Johnstone was dismissed, whilst Byrne was P convicted and fined £3 and costs, m default I 21 days' imprisonment. _ , f On n charge of using insulting langu&go, - wherehy a breach of tho peace was occasf; ioned, William Byrno was convicted and dia--5 charged. THEFT. On three charges of theft, Frank Harry Alexander limes was convictcd and ordered to com© ui> for sentenco when caLod upon | * CIVIL BUSINESS. Judgment by default with costs was awarded plaintiff in ea-ch of the following cases: — Trado iiuxi'iary Co., Ltd. v. 25". P. Nielsen, £3 Gs; Booth, Macdonald and Co., Ltd. v. W. Swan, £5 lCc; Slater, Sargent, and Dale v. William Duffy, i-i 33 7d; Arthur E. Smith v. J. Harris, £2 ss; H. Jd'.itson arid Co v. J. Armstrong, £!) 15s; William Alloa v B Butcher, £25 3d; W.- Strange and Co., Ltd. v. E. M. Page, £20 10a 2d; John ! S. 'Hutchison v. Edward Lanslie, £20; I Loughrey and Tully v. Vv. Goocli, £30 146 ■Id- Stanley Harris v. John Jackson, £58 C 3 lid; Annio Hern v. J. Murphy, £1 10s. James J. ft'ivea and Co., Ltd., asked for a judgment order against G. Hardaker, in respect of a claim of £S 10s od. J\o order was made. N. Tindal was ordered to pay R. B. Owen £3 lis 6d forthwith, in default one month's p imprisonment. I William Rowc was ordered to pay Henry 'i Thomas Jenkins £2i 2s forthwith, in default t, two months' imprisonment, no warrant to 1 issuo provided tho debt was paid off at the i ■ rato of £0 per month. George Martin was ordered to pay F. A. , Cook, Ltd., £5 lis Bd,. at the rale of £1 per I month, in default on© month's imprisou- ? ment. r . John Walker ordered to pay Frederick : Denham Wilson £3 17s Od, at t-ha ra<e of £1 per month, in default 11 days' imprisouS ment. ; A. N. Kiddey was ordered to pay Richaid ; Henry Rossiter £12 lis, at the. rate of £1 v per" month, in default sis weeks' imprisonment. A MOTOR COLLISION. John Guthrie, msuical practitioner (Mr R. Twynehani) claimed from G. A. Oakley, motor proprietor (Mr F. W. Johnston) £166 103 6d damages, comprising £116 15s 6d general and £30 special, by reason of a collision between a motor-car owned by the plaintiff and a motor-car owned by the dc- | fendant, and driven by his savant on tho Akarca-Little River road 071 March l£th last, which ooliision, plaintiff alleged, was caused by the default or neglect of the defendant's servant. After a hearing lasting tha greater portion cf tho day, the Court gave judgment for plaintiff for 4150 and costs. AXOTHER^COLLISION. The .above is one of many collisions reported in these columns during the past twelve months. These collisions are cortaiii to cost the car owner a considerable sum unices we take tho risk under one of o'.ir comprehensive policies. The premium is moderate ? lor a policy which insures the car- . j owner aeainst loss by collision, causing 1 | llamas© to his car, or claimp for dam- ( j age to pcrsocs or their property, and !■ loss by fire. Ring up 2'J65, Northern ! Assurance Co., Ltd. (G. G. and J. H.Aitken and Co.), 94 Hereford street. 2 KAIAPOI. j (Beforo Mr V. G. Day, S.M.) ' Charles Adam 3, on charges of assaultingmj William Te Uki and Jeannie To Uki, was fined 5s on each charge, with witnesses' expenses £2 ss. /

In F. G. Taylor r. P. Licklater, claim £4 ICs and passes;ion of a houso, an order was made, both parlies consenting, for possession on August 7th. , R. J. McKenzie. inspector under the bal? of Food and Act, procctded J. 11. Black-well for selling bre«:l which at . the time of sale weighed Tib lajoz, or cOi less than the 6eller represented it to be. l'or the defence the short weight was p.dmitte;., but not that it was wrongly represented. Evidence was given by John Ball, manajpsr of tho branch store, that he knew the meoector. and in soiling him a bsrrcouta loaf told' him it was a poor siunplo ant would not go full weight. H. M. \V right, stated that all the bread was baied in. the or.o bakehouse. The inspector had teste;.! i the bread at the main shop and tounn it . correct. Tho Magistrate said tnat- t.-.kin-into consideration, tho evidence to storekeeper knew tea inspector and cs- I plained that the bread was under t lio would dismiss tlie en*?. i In C. H. Wright v. A. Frr.rklin. claim £>. judimient was given for plain..iff by default. ]