MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1338, 16 January 1912, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before Mr, W. G. Riddell, S.M.) IN *' DRY " DISTRICTS. THE LABELLING OF LIQUOR. I'ALMER HEAD CASE. George Sotiriou was charged that, on December 23, he delivered to Albert Nicolas, of Palmer Head—a place situate within the N'o-Lieo'nse district of Wellington Suburbs—a certain package containing liquor, to wit, two gallon'- of beer. This, it wns alleged, was not labelled so as to show its contents in the manner required by the Act. Sotiriou, who was not represented by counsel, pleaded not guilty. Ho stated that the jars had l>oen duJy labelled, and suggested that the label hud conic off in tho sack when Police-Constable Taylor was examining the package. Tho police disputed tho statement that tho jars wero in a sack. Defendant was fined «£2. Joseph Henry Chaney, a brewery employee, was charged with sending the liquor. Mr. -J.. lt. Peacock, who appeared for him, stated that the Act required that no person should send or deliver liquor into a No-License area unless tho liquor were labelled. Defendant stated, in the" course of evidence (and ho also brought corroborative evidence) that he had properly labelled the jars. His Worship dismissed the information. WHEN IS LIQUOR "STORED"? Gertrude Bennett was charged with unlawfully storing bscr -in Wellington South, a No-License district," on December 29. She pleaded not guilty, and she was represented by Mr. A. Blair. Mr. Blair said that the facts wero that some beer was left at defendant's liouso by a bandmaster who intended to entertain the band at New : Year time. He left the liquor (here during the day with tho intention of ■ taking it to his own home in the evening. Tho section of the. Act which related to storage in NoLicense districts was intended to prevent such storage places as brewers' depots. If a dwelling was a store in such circumstances as this case' disclosed, it was wrong for the police to detain liquor at, say.. Mount Cook barracks. __ , His Worship reserved his decision. A TWENTY-POUND NOTE. Theft of a X2O-nole was alleged against William Martin Prettejohn, who was employed as manager at tho Coinmerckil ilotel. ...:... Mr. .1. J. M'Grath appealed for the defendant, who pleaded not guilty. Florence Paulson, licensee of the hotel, gave evidence that the money and a purse had been stolen from, the safe, and that Prettejohn was one of the only two people (besides herself) who had had the keys of the safe. Evidence was given .by a plumber who stated that, when ho was engaged in repairing a cistern at tho hotel, he had i'cund a purse which Mrs. Pauhen stated was tho missing one. Police evidence was given that tho defendant had cashed a at a Wellington shop, and that when he was questioned by detectives as to. the money in his possession and the purchases made ho had accounted for .£25 by saying that he had put £1 on a horse which won at Dunedin, and paid ,£<i Os., whereas (the polico said) the horse really paid £7 19s. Gd. , ... Tho defence was a complete denial. Accused stated that, as regarded tho dividend matter, all bookmakers did not pay a £7 10s. limit when betting totalisator odds-some paid less.. His Worship cousHored further explanation by defendant was necessary, and convicted him and fined him -C's. Mv. M'Grath asked for leave to appeal, and this was granted. OTHER CASES. For disobeying a maintenance order, Frederick Johnson was lined .£2. For insobriety, Florence M'Anally was fined ss:; William Tiefnay, £2; William Campbell Patterson, 10s.;'James Hughes, £1; and. John Byrne was fined .£3 for breaking a prohibition order. Albert Hansen was fined £2 for assaulting Thomas Johnson. , A fine of ,C 3 was imposed on Joseph Robinson for his committing an offensive act. . ' ■ William Williams was remanded on a charge of tho theft of a cart valued at £7, tho property of Denis Sullivan and others. William Frederick Jones was charged with the forgery of tho name: of I. Jacobus to a Post Office Savings Bank withdrawal receipt. Thp amount alleged to bo involved was £o. Defendant was remanded. ■ ■