MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3159, 10 August 1917, Page 7

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

RESERVED JUDGMENTS OFFENSIVE METHOD OF MANURING In ,the Magistrate's Court yesterday. Mr. S. E. Jl'Carlhy, S.M., Slivered rescried judgment in the case in »Jicl" ( J ™ "",,, by (Inspector to the Hutt County Council) proceeded against. Alfred Walters, market gardener, of Taita, for permitting a nu 1 sance to exist, on his premises. Whew a market gardener manure? his lana vmii decomposing animal matter and theioby establishes insanitary comhtione, not on y on his own land, but also in the sirounding homes, such manuring is not n luacni S the reasonable and proper carrying on of the trade of market e ? rdciiine«itlim the meaning of the Public Health Act, was the essence of the decision armeu at by the Magistrate. n „i ß nncc The information alleged that a notice existed on defendant's property by tno deposit thereon of offensive parts of dead animals, such as skins cars. oHal, e«., and that the counc 1 notified < tcienaa that ho must abate tho uiiteance. J™ 8 , B8 •had failed to do, lience the protontwn. After dealing with the legal P ointß , h „ B volvcd, tho Magistrate said *at^ cr _2 were five questions for J^^SX'oh (1) Did a nuisance (an "™ n ™ ; fiff and i^fz^l^withtKM Se, WA A? "and did such nuisance, still exist at tho date ol laying tee mior "(yDid the District Officer report such nuisance to the Hutt County CounciK (3) Did the council requisition.the ae fendant to abate the nuisance if auy^ (4) Has the defendant complied With sneu requisition? , . •_, ~„ ,i e . (5) Assuming a nuisance does exist on ire feudant'B land, lias the defendant estab lished the following faolB:-(a That tfle accumulation and. deposit l", 1 "? 1 ""' $ tho reasonable and propel- carrying on oi his trade of market gardener; (b) tn« such accumulation had not■ becfl Kept longer than necessary j (c) that, th! best practicable-means had been taken to pjl vent injury to health; (d) that no danger to health exists? . . .., Mr. M'Oarthy dealt exhaustively wit the methods adopted by the defendant and came to the conclusion that the delenda t had not taken the best practicable means to prevent injury to health. He was unable to find that while defendant carried on his manuring operations no serious danger to health existed. A mere fanciful objection with no other than a flimsy basis would not avail tho local authority; there must be a substantial menace to public health before the Court could make an order. While/the defendant adopted his present method or manuring, such a. menace undoubtedly existed. He pointed out that the nuisance had been notiued by tho District Health Officer. He was satisfied the nuisance would be recurring as long as the defendant adopted hiß present methods, and he, therefore, ordered him to effectively abate the nuisance by October 1, by either, burying the manure under twelve inches of, inoffensive soil or by collecting and burning all the offensive matter lying on tho surface of the land, or within seven inches therefrom. He also prohibited the recurrence of the nuisance. Defendant was fined £1. and was ordered to pay £1 for every day during which the nuisance continued unabated on the land after October 1. Defendant was also ordered to nay costs. At the hearing, Mr. T. W. Hislop appeare<l for the Hutt County Council, and Mr. P. W. Jackson for the defendant. TRANSACTION IN TYRES. Mr. M'Oarthy also delivered reserved judgment in the case in which Caselberg and Co., Ltd., proceeded against Harold W Brown to recover the sum of £42 Bs., being tho price of four Wood-Milne motorcar tyres sold by plaintifl to defendant. 'In the course of his judgmont. the Magistrate said that plaintiff's traveller sold the articles on a warranty, and tho defendant must be allowed a reasonable time to test that warranty. Tho defendant's car had 2 D rims, and the tyres in question could only be used satisfactorily on clincher rims. The traveller saw that the tyres would not fit the rims, but he did not undeceive the defendant. Each tyro under the warranty was to last 3000 miles if given rcasona-blo wear, and it was shewn that the four tyres did not exceed 3260 miles. Further, the tyres wore brittle through over-vulcanisation. Judgment waß, given for plaintifl for £10. with costs. At tho hearing, Mr. H. F. von Haast appeared for plaintifl, and Mr. J. J. M'Orath for defendant. SALE OF A BUSINESS. Mr. W. G. Hiddcll. 8.M., delivered reserved judgment in tho case in which Thomas Burl, storekeeper, Lower Hutt. prqcccdcd against Alfred Henry Bull, ot Greytown North, to recover the sum of £45 18s. 7d., balance alleged to be due in respect of the sale of a business at Featherston. The defendant countor-claimcd for £45 10s., the market value of certain goods which had beeu sold by the plaintifl and for which the defendant alleged he had not received credit. After a lengthy review of the evidence, Mr Itiddell gave judgment for plaintiff for £45 7s. 9d., with Court costs £1 10s.. aud solicitor's fee £3 ss. Defendant was non-suited on the coun-ter-claim. At the hearing, Mr. E. .['.Bunny appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. A. de \B. Brandon for tho-defendant. UNDEFENDED CASES. Mr. W. G. Itiddell, S.M.. gave judgment for plaintiff by default in the following eases:—Frank Grady v. William Douglas, £12, costs £1 12s. 6d.: Vacuum Oil Co., Ltd:, v. N. Winklemau, 6d., costs 175.: H. Hanson v. Philip O'Keef. £2 17s. 9d.. costs. 125.; E. W. Mills and Co., Ltd., v. S. H. Newcombe. £2 2s. lid., costs 135.: Griffiths and Co., Ltd., v. Ah Wing, costs only, 25fi.; Barber and Co.: v. Evans and Smith, £6 17s. 4d., costs £1 3s. 6d.; E. Eosenberg and Co. v. Geo.'go Swonsson, £8 3s!, costs £i 7s. 6d:: Wellington Gas Co., Ltd.. v. Walter S. Mansfield, £1 45., costs 55.; Dominion Rubber Co. v. E. W. Scanlon, £13 155.. cost 3 £1 Us. 6d.; Eose Mary Young v. William Thompson, £10, costs £1 4s. 6d. JUDGMENT SUMMONS. In a. judgment summons case, B. Fisher was ordered to nay Frost and Frost the sum of £16 ss. by August 23 or serve fourteen days in gaol. POLICE OASES. Mr. fj. E. M'Oarthy, S.M., heard the police cases at the Magistrate's Court yesterday. Harriet Maloney, for whom Mr. C. W. Tanner appeared, was convicted of the 'theft of a pair of lady's shoes, value 145., the property of H. Hannah and Co., also of a pair of lady's boots, value 10s. 9d„ tho property of James W. Martin. The woman stole the boots and shoes from the shop doors and sold them to second-hand dealers, giving false names and addresses. She was sentenced to three months' im- . prisonment on each charge, the term 6 to I be concurrent. For insobriety Emily Foster, an old offender, was sent to gaol for fourteen days. Patrick Sinnott, a returned soldier on crutches, was convicted and discharged. Four first offenders were dealt with in the usual lenient manner. CLAIM FOE DAMAGES. Mr. S. E. M'Oarthy, S.M., was engaged the greater part of yesterday ,hearing the case in which Ellen Jane Eccsby, of Nai Nai, proceeded against Christopher Hobbs on a counter-claim for £75 damages for alleged trespass and disturbance of plaintiff's possession of certain dairy premises at Nai Nai, which were leased from the defendant by the plaintiff. The taking of evidence had not concluded when the Tlotirt rose, and the further hearing was adjourned sine die, the parties to agree on a date convenient. Mr. E. P. Bunny appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. P. W. Jackson for defendant.