Magistrates Court.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 15, 12 October 1907, Page 6

Magistrates Court.

(Bofore Mr. Riddell, S.M.) At the Magistrate's Court yesterday morning three first-offending inebriates' were fined 55., in default 24 hours' imprisonment, and anothor similar offender was convicted and discharged. SECOND-HAND, DEALERS' HOURS. A second-hand dealer named Thomas Costello, pleaded guilty to having purchased a pair of boots after the hour of 6 p.m. in contravention of section 10 of the Second-hand Dealers' Act,' 1902. For the prosecution it was stated that Sergeant Beattie visited defendant's shop in connection , with a, charge against a man of the'theft-of a' pair of. hoots. Defendant' handed him a written statement admitting, haying .purchased'* pair of boots at 7.45 p.m., and on this tho information was laid. Defendant stated that a man : came into the shopi hard up, and with nothing to pay for, his board, and he purchased the boots from him. His -Worship advised defendant to gei a copy of the Second-hand Dealers Act. By his- act he) had made himself liable to a penalty up to £5. Ho would be convicted and fined 10s., with 7s. costs, in dofauljfc 48 hours' imprisonment. . ■ ' .'' USE OP FIREARMS. " . ' John Ramsey appeared on a charge of haying.discharged a revolver within the limits of the city without permission in writing from the City Council. The information was laid under section 452 of tho city by-laws. , Station-Ser-geant Phair stated -that , defendant, who lived in Crawford Street, thought ho would have some practice with a' revolver. He placed a tin on a post in his back yard .and commenced firings at it. 'At tho timo some lads were within range, and one of them was: struck in the foot by a bullet, j His "Worship said that no doubt defendant was unaware of the by-law prohibiting the'rise of firearms within tho city. The public, however," must bo protected. , Defendant would bo convicted and fined 10s., 'and 7s. ,costs,-' in-do-; fault 24 hours'imprisonment. : A. middle-aged man named James M'Allion, on a charge of having discharged, a revolver at Thomas J. Smith with intent to do bodily; harm, was. re-. manded.-until October;,l6. ■ '.- «,£» k, r Thp incident which led to the arrest of M'AUion occurred in. Wingfield Street at 10.30 on Thursday night. Smith lives at No. .3 Wingfield Street. It is alleged that he heard men arguing, and. on opening his door saw a man .inside his gife and accused outside.. Ho asked tlieni to go away, arid, as he-went towards his door he heard two shots' fired. It is alleged' that' he saw accused draw a revolver from his' pockot, raise his hand,, and fire twoshots. , Smith .went inside and shut' the door. Some one knocked, but ho did not answer. A few minutes' after two. men made, a noise outside the door. ' Smith then Baw. the police land gave' M'AJlion and another man, who was convicted, of drunkenness yesterday morning, ,in charge. . v", ' 'I ' AN ASSAULT CASE.. ' . John Olof Anderson, a' : Swede,' ap--poarcd ,on a charge of having on Octo-i ber 1 assaulted Harry Johnson, a- Norwegian! Defendant said accused' met him in Haining Street about 8 p.m. on the date in question, and said; "I've got you nowl" Defendant had a knife in his hand, and made'a hit at plaintiff' with/the-'knife, cutting'' through his' overcoat and coat. To defend himself: he kicked at Anderson 1 and then ran away. Defendant followed him,threatening. ■ As he ran past the Royal Tiger Hotel a constable stopped' him; and he thep stated the facts of the case to tho officer. - - To Mr. Wilford:- His name was .Matthias Ellison, arid he "was otherwise known as "Tho Lap." John Olof. Anderson stated that on the night in question hfl' was going down Martin Square .when Johnson came up _ behind him and struck him, felling him to the ground. He was smoking at the time and had a knife in his hand, and as he got on to his feet he hit out at plaintiff. He then chased Johnson down the road. His Worship,-, in giving his' decision, said that prior , to the assault the two men had apparently been bad friends/ Ho thought the evidence showed that' defendant did use the knife, and tho : only thing was whether ho had sufficient'provocation. . Personally hb 'did : riot think tho provocation was sufficient/ Defendant must be penalised, and] would bo convicted and. senionced to 14 days'imprisonment. On the'application of Mr Wilford, £10 10s. was fixed as security for appeal; Subsequently Mr. Jackson, - on; behalf Of Mr. Wilford, asked His Worship to vary his decision, as accused 1 had no ground for appeal unless on a' law point' or in'event of the sentence being longer. ; His Worship said -he intended point-: ing this out, and added that lie'could not see. his way to alter his decision by imprisonment or infliction of a fino. MAINTENANCE. . ( Waltor Dixon, Isaac- Dixon, and George Dixon wore ordered .to contribute 3s. each l per week towards the support of their mother, tho first payment to be. made on October 2J. BY-LAW CASES. Wm. Callan.pleaded guilty to having allowed a cart to remain in Donald M'Lcan Street, for'a longer timo than: was necessary for loading or unloading. His Worship commented on tho dangorous ( practice. Accidents happened from similar broaches and • would continue to happen. Accused would bo. convicted and. fined 205., with 275. costs.

Two boys, Gcorgo M'Namara and Sidnoy Murray, pleaeed guilty to a charge'of having ridden bicycles in the city without lights. Both woro convicted and.ordered- to pay costs 75., in default 24 hours' imprisonment. A period of sovon days was allowed in which to pay tho fines. tJis Worship impressed upon tho. offenders the necessity for using lights at night. '

For allowing a horse to wander in Tory Street, Ernest Hunter was fined 25., with 7i. costs.

POLICE POWER OVER BILLIAED ROOMS. (Boforo Mr. Riddell, . S.M.) . An information was laid against Joseph Ryan undor t' lo .Gaming and Lotteries Act charging him 'with having, on Sunday, September 29, wilfully prevented Sergeant Dale from entering tbo Empire Billiard Room, Parish and Manners Streets. Station-Sergeant Phair, who . prose-, cuted, stated that Sergeant Dalo was attracted by what ho thought was billiards being played in tho room in question, and wont to tho door and knocked. Ho could see a light under the- door,' and heard voices inside. Tho Sergeant mentioned his name', . and said hewished to inspect tho building. No (me answered tho door. The Sergeant left the building, but went back. later on with a. constablo. On this "occasion lie was admitted. Mr. Herdman appeared' for defendant, and stated that tho suggestion .that billiards had loon: played on tho' premises on tho. ovening in question was denied. .As to tho charge of having refused to admit a police officer to, the-premises.the maximuift penalty apparently was; a' fine of £100, or three months' imprisonment. Tho offence was an. unusual one, and lie thought this prosecution was. probably the first, of. tho kind over instituted. This might riot bo so, but it- was the. first he had heard-of. . Tho offence being an unusual one, he would' ask His Worshop to believo that tho man was ignorant of the'fact that ho was committing an offence in not admitting tho constablo. Defendant was lying on the bed. at the time, and did not take any notice of tho'knock, as it was a common thing-for, people to enquire at his door qn Sundays, when tnoy were looking for other: rooms in the building. It also happ'oned frequently that boys knocked at tho'.door for . a-lafk. Defendant admitted having -heard the knock and somebody saying that Sergeant Dale was, at tho door, but thinking it was a joke took 'nonotice. Later 6n, • tho - knock came again, and this tinio.defendant got up and .admitted- the police. ;> There was nothing of ail unusual character about the room, the billiard tables, all being'covered, and nothing suspicious. Tho only fault that. had . been- committed was a breach.of a section.of .tho Gaming -and Lotteries Act,' of which very littlo: was known. -Tho desire of tho police was, he understood, to - make it known that they had power to go to'a billiard-room at any ,hour of the night and could gain, admission. Under the' circumstances, he wOuld ask for a light penalty. Defendant had been fifteen, or sixteen'. years 'conducting billiardrooms, . and had no' stain on his char-, actor. ■ . -: •'

His said defendant hadbeen 1 charged under,, Sections 24, 25,' ;'and, subsequent 'sections of "tho. Gaming and LottbribS Act. "fho penalty seemed to, be a heavy one for an offenco of the kind.i and there was 1 little to be said in the present" case. ■'It; was not known very widely that police officers had!the ,right' to enter billiard-rooms at 'any'.' hour.' 'The' defendant's defence might be'correct; bit he; had only .himself to- blame' for being brought before the Court.When, he ] heard' the. Sergeant givo his namo, ho'should have gone to the door. Taking into.'consideration the whole of the facts, he thought a nominal' penalty would meet the case. . Defendant would 1 bo' convicted arid fined J 2os.|' with 155.. 'costs, in' default seven days' imprisonment.. ALLEGED ADULTERATION OF MILK. Tho, adjouroed feearing;of,the case H. P. Bennett; (Inspectprji.Pubhc Health Department) r'. Henry BoclJey; milkIvenddr, was continued yesterday. The defendant was : charged, oil two '.ihfor-. mations, with having in his'dopot milk which was alleged to have been adulterated with formalin for preservative purposes. Mr. Myers .conducted ' tho prosecution, and Mr. Gray appeared tor defendant.

■ G.'-W. Steward, District Clerk to the Health Department; gave ovidenco. regarding tho issue of supplies ,of formalin disinfectant to the departr menu's inspectors. A. P. Bennett, B. A. Franks, and P. L. Hicks, the department's inspectors under examination, described the' methods usually adopted with regard to milk inspection:' • Dr. J. S. _ M'Laiii'iri, Government' Analyst,- outlined the.usual tests for analysis . 1 of milk.'' • Formalin;' , when used as a preservative, was used in very small quantities. Traces Usually disappeared in about three weeks. Dr.",J. P. Frengley, District Health Officer, considered "that milk containing formalin as a preservative was unsuitable for humain < consumption. O lt was dangerous for 1 infants, 1 : young people, and: delicate, adutls. • The Com-; mittce oflnqmry set up in 1599 by the British Local Government Board had fully investigated the question of food and drink preservatives, and in 1901 presented - a report in which the use of, formalin as a preservative was! con' demned.' The present charge was, so far as he was aware, the first'of its kind out here.', i' ■' V ,Dr.,R. H. Makgill, Government Bacteriologist* gave corroborative evidence. In reply to a question by Mr. Gray, ho thought it was quite impossible, that an individual who; had been handling formalin, could, by reason of his proximity to. a milk-can, impregnate ' the contents by means of any/.odour, of' that disinfectant " which might .hang about his clothes.:,. ■•i-r Leslio: John Ell, assistant, in the .Department's Laboratory, gave evidence regarding the sterilising of all bottles and corks issued to'the inspectors for tho purpose of ; taking samples' for analysis. j' ' ' ■ After hearing argument by counsel on. both side's, his ' Worship adjournedthe proceedings until . Monday, October 14, at 2.15. p.m., when further evidence will be called. \ . Albert Lark, William E. Burne, and Ernest Sussex, were each fined 55., and' costs ,75., in default three, days' imprisonment, ,for riding bicycles on the public footpath at Karori. James XV. Henderson, charged; on two informations with' having allowed a cow to wander on ■' tho; Old Karori Road, was fined 55., and costs 145., in default, three days' imprisonment.'. For, having allowed two horses to wander .-it, Eastbourne, Herbert Martin ' was 'lined 10s., in default three days' imprisonment. CIVIL JURISDICTION. (Before Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.) .'. RESERVED; JUDGMENTS. HACKNEY CARRIAGE' CASE.. " Doyle v. Lane. Lane, tho defendant was charged with'having, as tho driver of a hackney ea'rriago plying for hiro, refused' to tako .as a . passenger tho complainant, ( Walter Pearson. Complainant alleged that the _ cabman had refused tho legal fare, stipulating for a higlior ono. The Corporation Inspector, Mr. J. Doyle, prosecuted under tho by-laws.' Tho .caso for tiio defence rested mainly upon clause 395 of tho by-law- covering the hire of licensed vehicles; which''says, in effect, that .tho drivor of a' licensed vohicle may refnso to admit a passenger on tho' ground that the vehiclo has been already engaged. Tho Magistrate held that this clauso.. throw upon tho defoiadant the onus of proving whether . ho had, when hailed by Pearson, shown, then and thcro, that ho .was 'under engagement. , • Tho evidence showod that neither to the complainant Pearson, nor, subsequently, to the Inspector, hed tiano done so. Further, defendant was on tho stand, and, (clauso 397). could not oxenso himself on tho plea that he had already been ongaged. Referring to counsel's con-

tention that an information, and con* viction, under a by-law must state the particular by-laiv under which tho act . charged, is , alleged to bo an offence, Hi? Worship hold that a by-law covering a. particular occupation. oilght.. to bo known and observed by those persons governed, by its provisions: ; .Tha . defendant woulcj be convicted and fined • 55., with costs. - . . V ' CLAIM FOR OYSTERS. ' Colo v. Union S.S. Company. This was a claim for £7' the value .of. seven s , a r® , .oysters, snipped through the defendant company at various dates, and not delivered.' The defendant company.' admitted' liability . in - respect' of the first throe sacks; .but .contended that its liability covered the landed cost only.. Dr. M'Arthur held that; it was - clear that ; the . Company. ;, was; responsible for the delivery of . tlio first three sacks,, and jtidgment-must'bo for the full value. '-Regarding the'remain-' dor, the oyidonco as to their condition"' when shipped was so : mSa®re-.th'at-"he i • must.,dismissthat.:. 1 clam. Iho onus of, prosecution, fiifxher, should .be 'upon the consignor, not; the consignee. . Judgment' would' bo given, for £3, and costs £1 12s.'DRIVING .WITHOUT. LIGHTSRobert Thomas Pell was' charged with' f£5 ng ii'? n ' tIlB I ' er ®n , nC of Augiikt' 9,'1007, driven- along, tho". main . Karon" Koad attar sunset-withont'liglits, .'with' the' result .that he came into'collision' with' a tram-car. '" : • ■■ 1 William Gilbert Johnston (motbrmanL deposed that, on that particular evening, ■ about.. 5.53 p:m., ho ■ was .coming round, one of tho sharp'curves'on the . down-trip. Jhe weather was' .thic&i / • the rails greasy, and' hs was-'.coiiiina'' down, M;., a: moderate, speed, 'A, two-' horsed oxpress - suddenly . loomed up', showing no lights,' and the after part ii i ® ar .: stru °k :-.the express'-"'' He ' pulled iip,' and. the conductor ascoN tained the express-driver's name-• * Frank Atkinson (conductor) gava corrobative evidence.' .;, f The '.Magistrate,, that'tho ouonee was a serious 0.".e, .whiclrmight have been attonded w^th'' serious consequences. . Defendant would be-fined' 40s. and costs..

, A CHARGE OF THEFT; 1 • ' John Sinclair; pleaded, guilty, .to -it charge of theft,.of, several; articles of clothing,, valued ;at.' £2 10s.', tho -pro-, party °f . Thomas' Milieu,; chief steward of,. the. , steamer- 'Zcaliuidia.'' „Aceused'. went, ,on board, ,tho ' vessel ■ yerterday, : afternoon made, his ,to tho, cabin of the chi&f stewed.,-; After; sonie : . of. the clothing had ' aeetf niisscd, a ' soarch. was and acc\iscd.v.-aa found cii ■ the. b'oat.. Ee was> ; ;wearing' an.. overcbat • and' hd ! ; ,belonging' to.. Millen, and had a,clothes-brush'iii 1 the 1 pocket, of, the coat.' . Station".'Sergeant ■' Phair aocused was.,working pnvobard "a.steamer'■ until five .weeks ago, when'' ; he : left.' Since'then ho had been cadging'afoiit, the town 1 . He was Apparently' one-of' ; those.' good-for-nothing,, individuals.'^'-'-His; Worship, in 'sentencing'.accusfed''! to twbnty-bno days' imprisonment, .with'' hard labour.' remarked r.hat. tho'oif" n ca was a bare-faced one,' ivith no extemu ' ating circumstances-. * An:-order .whs made -for the -return of the article*'' stolen. 1■ ;■ 'i' 'i j'.'.OTHER BUSINESS , ■ Judgment , was : entered up j plaintiffs. in .tho following cases Wellington, Trades Agency v. Walter Reld,, £5 , 55., costs. 235. 6d-.thp .same ,v. w Maria' Aitken,. 235. 6d;,' costs ssi!f, the' ! samo v-.' Gbo. ; ,Wm. Bon-ater, £9; lebsts ~ 235; 6d; ; : In. tho case Henry Bardsley'; v. '.Wm- ' '^judgment^'.'siuni.'' l ; Further evidence was' 'taken '-lii *th®/ case of Wm; ilerirv, Smith'. toil City Council, a cldim for • "£63; in'.,-, respcct of 'damages' son of defendant's negligence,,in..a lcollision' between a trani'rcar,..and'.'a,' dbubfelibrsbd express oivried. by plain-!* tiff, whereby both horses \w;ere'so, 6bri* ously injured' that tHey 'hail been; dostrbyed. His Worship'reserved his ao-{ cision. ;