MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 234, 27 June 1919, Page 5

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

POLICE BUSINESS

THEFT OF BICYCLE TUBES

Before Mr. 1". V. Frnzer, S.M.; at the ■Magistrate's Court yesterday, a foreigner named Yoaquin Leonards Moeller Qtoro pleaded guilty to a charge of. thett of twelve bicycle tubes, valued at £3, the property of some person unknown. The accused was arrested by Detective M. Garner yesterday morning. Chief-Detec-tive Boddam stated that the accused was a trimmer on the steamer Port Chalmers, and on arrival in Auckland on June 16, he stole the tubes from a motor-car. Ho subsequently, came to and disposed of the tubes for 245. As the ship was leaving port yesterday, and the accused was required on board, His Worship decided'to impose a fine of £5, and oicbrod accused to refund the sum of 245. to tin, p..'i-son who purchased the tubes, Thaddeus Edward Doody was remanded till July 3 on a charge of stealing from the dwelling-house, of John Richard Wetter a ring and suit-case valued at £1 ISs Cd, the property of Henry John Dreyfeldt. , A seniom'c of seven days' imprisonment with hard labour was imposed on James J'arrell, w'ho admitted a charge of committing a grossly indecent act in BaKance Street. ►

For some unknown reason, Peter M'C.'arro'r. wilfully damnged a pone of glass valued at'w£3 Bs., and also a quantity of. crockery, valued at .£4 Bs., the pmperly of Mrs. Ellen Clark. After committing the act.accused reported the matter to the police, and was then arrested. He could not explain why had done the diimuge, ana asked His Worship for a chance. A conviction Ira's recorded and accused wns oidered to pay the cost of tlia damage done, and was allowed three weiks in which to find the money.

A fir.e ol' j!S was imposed on Peter Cieoige' for committing a nuisance in Tjnii.uki ijlreet, and he was convicted and discharged for drunkenness. For drunkenness, Eobert Thompson woe filial .£1 nod Hector Gilchrist wns fined a similar amount, and was also made the subject.of a prohibition order. Roderick M'Leod wa s convicted and discharged for drunkenness,' and was convicted and ordered to come up for senbncu i> i.en called upon within 12 months for a breach of his prohibition order. Hi) was aiso ordered to pay 17s. Cd. medical expenses. Two 'first offenders were fined 5?.' each, a third was fined'los,, and u fourth was convicted and ordered to pay 17s. 6d.■ medical expenses, and was, iin Addition,- made the subject of a prohibition order. SEPARATION OEDER REFUSED. . Tns, hearing ol the suit brought by Doris Augusta Marley against her husbffnd, George Sims Marley, for summary Bepaofiticn. maintenance, and the guardianship of one child, was concluded before Mr. ]•'. V. I'rozei, S.M. The defendant follows the occupation of a physical cultuia expert, under the name of Garnet Sims. ■ After hearing considerable evidence as to defendant's/association with a lady pupil of his class, His Worship, in summing up, said that the bone of contenthe parties, appeared to be tlu> lady pupil. He considered that the defendant's attentions towards his pupil wero'BUch. nu,to have inflicted a degree of cruelty upon Mrs. Marley. As to.the treatment of the baby, His Worship-con-sidered that Marley had not been unkind to it, and his only comment on its bathing was that it was usually left to womenfolk. The defendant appeared to show a lack of consideration towards his i. ife. He liked to be the dictator in Jiis household, and His Worship suggested that he might be a little more conciliatory towards his wife and pay more iij.tuntion to her. It had been suggested ihnt the defendant's action in "having his wife admitted to an institution was an act of cruelty, hut His Worship did not think such was the case, in view of tlio circumstances. Knowing Airs. . Marley's nervous condition, the defendant had shown a serious lack of consideration in not permitting-her to see the'baby. However, His Worship did not feel justified in making a separation order, ,nd suggested: that the parties might come to some better understanding. With this object in view he would adjourn the case sine die, conditionally on the defendant paying .£2 per week maintenance towards the support of his wife. He al6o .-iiade a formal condition for Mrs. Marley to have custody of the child, with a proviso that Hi:-, defendant should see it every v?eek.

Mr. A. W. Blair appeared for the complainant, and Mr. P. J. O'Regnn for the defendant.

CIVIL BUSINESS A WATERSIDER'S CLAIM. ' The hearing of the case in which Victor Owler, waterside worker, claimed I lie sum of .£B4 Os. Wd. from lluddart-Parker, Ltd., .iras considered before Mr. W. G. Eiddell, S.M. ■ The .statement of claim set out that, on July 25, 1918, the plaintiff was employed trimming coal on the Ulinaron, and when descending a ventilator into a bunker hold he was struck on.lhe head and shoulders by a large lump of coal. As a .consequence he was totally disabled from following his employment until October , S, 1918. Tt was alleged that the company were guilty of negligence through their servant failing to ascertain that all the men in. his gang were safely below before work was commenced or resumed. The plaintiff .had been paid .£2O 12s. 6d., being nine week's compensation under the Workers' Compensation Act, and ho now claimed for. .£29 IDs., balance of wages tor eleven weeks, £± is. hospital expenses, ami J250 as general damages. Counsel for the defendant company raised a nonsuit point, contending that the plaintiff had mi right to use the ventilator after starting work' for his own convenience. He considered that the claim was an impudent one. The ship was a transport, and work was ' required to be done in a hurry, but it was n wellknown fact that men wasted.their time. His Worship reserved decision. .■ Mr. P. J. O'Eegan appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. A. W. Blair for the defendant company. I CLAIM FOB MILK. The case in which the-Karori' Milk Supply Co., Ltd., claimed from.. James Oodber, Ltd;, ami the liquidators of the estate, the sum of .£l7O 12s. -Id. for milk supplied, and the value of a number of milk cans, was concluded before Mr. W. G. Kiddell. S.M. ■ The plaintiff's case was that Godbers, Ltd., were under contract with J. Lewis for the daily,supply of 50 gallons.of milk at Is. 3d!'per gallon. Lewis sold his farm, and the plaintiff company continued the supply at Is. 3d. per gallon, but not under contract. When the City Council took over the milk.supply the price was raised to Is. 5d., and the increase was the cause of the account not being paid. The milk cans were left outside the Lambton Railway Station ill the request of .Mr. F. Godber. so it was alleged, and they had gone, astray. It was submitted,for itho. defence that the plaintiff company had taken ovet Lewis's contract,-and that.the milk'cans had been left at the railway station for the convenience of bath parties. Al'tci hearing lengthy evidence ' His ' Worship reserved decision'. "..' ' Mr. H. F. O'Leary appeared lor tho\ plaintiff company, and Mr. Douglas Jackson for tho defendants. • J UDGMENTS BY DEFAULT. Mr.. W .G. Kiddell, S.M., gave judgment for the plaintiff by default in tho following undefended cases:—Thomas Ballinger, Ltd.. v. Dudley-Byrne, JHO 13s. fid.,' costs .CI 13s. (id.; C. J. Johnson and Sons v. Elizabeth Phillips, costs only, 145.; Vacuum Oil Co., Ltd:, v. A. ('. Napier, £4 ss. 6d.. costs 195.; 0.-mond and Son (N.Z.), L'.d.. v. F. Morlcy. ail lOs. (id., costs 55.; City Corporation v. L. Mulonev, £1 os. Bd., costs lis.'; Veiteh and A'iliin, v. J. Bcasley, .£3 2s. fid., costs 10s. ; same y. P. Walker. £!) n s . lid., costs .£1 is. lid.; same v. T. Young, J!l 2s ad., costs 55.; same v. James Scott £C> "s. 2d;, costs -£1 *3s. Cd.; Karori Borough Council v. John Fuller, ,£D 7s. 5d., costs 55.; same v. Robert Ednviston, Hs. Id., costs Gs.: Arthur William O'Brien v Alben Josephus Craig, .CJO Os. 3d., cosis £2 Us.; Thonipson Bros., Ltd., v. 11. Berkcfct, M 19s. Sd., costs ,C 1 Its,; John Dnt'liio and Co., Ltd., v. Ogden and Ibell, £2. 2s. 7d., costs 75.; Jane Rutherford Yates v. Te .Rongokaliina Pnrutn. £U We., costs .£1 10s. (id.