HUTT AND PETONE

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1248, 4 October 1911, Page 8

HUTT AND PETONE

(From Our Special Correspondent.) AFTER A HALL. Oil the morning following Hip Hutt Club's ball at Lower JJutt on the evening ol September "i, a quantity of liquor which liarj been kepi in tne hall was missed. .13 a vesuit ot inquiries made tw;> young men, Allied Williams ami Thomas 'lurner, were jointly charged at Lower llutt on Aloijdav morning with tho Utek ot lIS bottles nt wine, ami 2. r > bottles of beer trom the King lleorge Theatre 011 September 'Jll. j Jioth accuscd pleaded not guilty. They were repre.-enteil by .Mr. M'Grath. Archibald Black, custodian of Hie Hutt Club, staled that when 110 left the hall about 2 o'clock in the morning, lie left behind 38 l.otiies of wine and 28 bottles ol beer. In the morning when he returned about, half past eight for the purpose of taking away the liquor, ho discovered that ouly three bottles of beer' remained. When ho left the hall early in the morning, there still remained thero Turner, Williams, and others. Roy Delauey, a boy who assisted the caterer, said lie saw Turner open about six bottles of beer alter Black had gone. Williams, Turner, and another consumed Iho contents. Similar evidence was given by William Hawick, caterer. Constable M'lyenzie, who conducted the cise for the police, stated Hint' he,searched the houses of the two defendants, and Howick's. In a stable at Nainai, which Williams was in charge of, he fonnd a sack containing 20 bottles of wine. He slid to Williams: "What's this, Williams?" and Williams replied: "You've got me." Williams further stated that he had stolen the wine from the hall with tho assistance of another. Later he made a statement confessing the charges brought against him, Mr. M'Grath, in addressing the Bench, held that thof't had not' been proved. Dr. M'Arthur said that thero was no evidence of theft, against Turner. Williams, however, would he convicted and fined -10>.. in default. If days' imprisonment. Time was allowed in which to find t'lie money, and the liquor was ordered to ljc returned to the owners. LOWER HUTT COURT. Dr. M'Arthur, S.M., presided at the monthly sitting of tho Lower Hutt MagisCourt' on Monday morning. There were also on tho Bench Messrs. Wilkin and Cudby, Justices of the Peace. John O'Keefe was charged with using ticket which had previously expired. Mr. M'Urath, who appeared for defendant, who was not . present, said that O'Keefe was uot' awaro at the time that tho ticket had expired. When told of Ihc fact he .willingly paid the fare and the fine. Defendant was convicted nud discharged. Arising out of this another charge was brought against O'Keefe, that of using insulting language on the Hutt Railway Station. He pleaded guilty to a technical breach, and was lined 10s., with costs 9s. Ernest Mudgway, for procuring liquor for a person against whom a prohibition order had been issued, was fined 40s. with costs 75.; in default 14 days' imprisonment. 'Judgment was given for plaintiff by default in tho civil case J. It. Puray v Leonard A. Hobbs, <22 ]"s. Gd., costs 12s. In a judgment summons ease A. Wells Newton v. William H. J-edbroolr, a claim for £5 10s. Gd., no order was made. The Town Clerk of flic Lower Hutt' Borough Dir. Percy R. Purser) proceeded against Henry Hun-ell in the Hutt Magistrate's Court yesterday for commencing tho erection of a house on or about April 19, at Alicet'Own, without first obtaining a permit as required by the by-laws. In giving evidence Mr. .Purser said that the offence was a very aggravated one. Despite repeated 'warning from the council the defendant proceeded to erect the building. The by-laws had been disregarded, and the council 'absolutely defied. He was instructed to asl: for a hea',4 penalty. Defendant did not' put in on appearance. Dr. M'Arthur, S.M., said the. case certainly appeared to be a very aggravated one, and called for the infliction of the highest penalty. Tho offence. :he noted, was n continuing one, and defendant' was liable to a fine of «£5 per day. If a heavy fine was.jiot imposed-t'he're wouldKe all sorts oi houses going up'in the district.- Defendant was fined .£2O, with the option of fourteen days' imprisonment.