MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 39, 9 November 1918, Page 12

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

SELLING LIQUOR TO A YOUTH. . Mr. F. V. Grazer, S.M., presided over a sitting of the Magistrate's Court held yesterday, and dealt with tho police cases. For insobriety Alexander l Aspin, against whom there was one. previous conviction, was fined 10s., in default 46 lours' imprisonment. Two Jrst offenders who failed to appeal had their bail of 10a. each forfeitoa, and another first offender was fined 5j., with the alternative of 24 hours' imprisonment •. Samuel Vogel Maeon was charged that, on October 5. without having a license, ho did'sell'beer to a vouth, and further did sell liquor in a No-License district. According to the facts adduced in evidence, fi lac employed in a kitchen in Wellington South arranged with another youth' (q procure some beer. The latter requested the: defendant to procure. for him four bottles of beer. This the de-' fendant alleged he did not do, but instead gave the lad a jar of hop beer./ The defendant is the driver of a cart delivering cordials. ' The first youth said he gavft the defendant two half-crowns and received Is. fid. in change, On obtaining the jar the two lads, who wore soon afterwards joined by a'third, retired to a shed/in a brickyard* and there started operations on the jar. The' lad employed in the kitchen, having paid for the alleged beer, imbibed freely, and admitted having had eight or nine glasses. He subsequently left hi 3 mates and went to Newtown, where he was arrested for being jiopekssly drunk. This lad admitted that prior to receiving the jar from defendant he, had drunk half a bottle of stout From certain admissions lie made to the police the defendant was interviewed, when he, it was alleged, dollied all knowledge of the matter. In his evidence the defendant said that he delivered to the boys a jar of hop beer only. He did not procure any beer for them. The Magistrate held that the evidence of the three boys was strong enough tc warrant a conviction, and as the defendant had supplied liquor to youths, which was an aggravated offence, lie imposed a fine of .£2O, with costs amounting to 28s. On the second charge defendant was convicted and discharged. Mr. G. Watson appeared for tho defendant. ' -

MILK PROSECUTIONS. J. Trottei, dairyman, Jlakara, was proceeded against by Frederick W. Rawlinso'ii, Inspector under the Pure Food and Drugs Act, with soiling milk deficient in butter-fat without first informing the purchaser of the nature of the adulteration. The sample taken analysed 2.8 per cent of fat instead of 3.25 per ceut. as required by the standard. J[r. ,T. iM. Tudliope, who appeared for tlio prosecution, said that tho breach was due to carelessness more than any tiling else. Ihc explanation given by defendant was thai a quantity of milk had been purchased from a particular farm, and the milk.had not been mixed. Tlio defendant was convicted and fined .C 3, with costs amounting to .£1 18s. Gd. Charles Sunnex, dairyman, of Lyall

Bay, pleaded guilty to a similar charge. Mr. Tiulhope said that the defendant was in a small way of business. The sample taker analysed 2.85 per. cent. Sunnex haa been in business for a few months, and of nine samples taken only one was found to be below the standard. The defendant, said that when he purchased the business ho made arrangements for his supply of milk and paid the supplier a halfpenny per gallon in advance of tin? price asked on tho understanding that ho would bo indemnified in tha event of a prosecution for the milk being below the standard. He did not possess a lactometer. The defendant was fined ,£3 with costs 3&s. Gd.

W. li. Reid, dairyman, Hopper Street, for whom Mr. H. F. O'Leary appeared, pleaded guilty to a similar charge. Mr. Tudhoiifc said that the defendant was in a largo way of business, and during the year of thirty samples taken only one was found to be klow the standard. The defendant was fined £3, with costs 38s. 6d. •