MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 132, 28 February 1920, Page 9

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

CHARGE OF STEALING COAL

DISMISSED AS TRIVIAL Three wharf labourers and one Harbour Board employee appeared at tho Magis--tiate's Court yesterday, to answer charges of stealing a small quantity of coal, the property of the Union Steaih Ship Company. The accused were Burton, George Sharkey, and Alfred Walker (waterside workers), and Edward Watson (Harbour Board.employee). ■~..!■ .Mr. E; Page, S.M.„ was on the bench'. Chief-Detective Ward prosecuted, and Mr. H. F. O'Leary appeared for the accused. The _ police evidence.- was to. the "ffent that the men were seen leaving the wharves with parcels, which -vero found to contain coal. Their names wero taken and proceedings wero instituted-for 'heft. Tho wharf labourers said that they had picked the coal un on tho wharves'when it dropped off carts. Watson said that tho coal ho carried had been given to .him. . For somo time past there' had been complaints regarding the theft of coal from the wharves, and the police were directed to- put a stop to the prastbe. Three of the accused stated in Court that they had picked tho cnnl up at the entranco to the wharves. Watson maintained that tho coal he carried was picked un by him on the road troy during the lunch-hour-Counsel directed the Bench's attention to the fact that tho police gave the men an excellent reputation, and that they had in tho past been in the habit of picking up coal on the wharves and taking it home. They never received anv warning about the prohibition against taking coal from the wharves-. Ho submitted .that the. case was a trivial one. and that-a conviction for theft should not bo recorded,' i. After, reviewing the evidence His Worship said it appeared that it had been the custom for'somo considerable period to allow the coal to be taken from the wharves, and no steps had toon taken to stop its.-removal until the Union Company realised the huge nuanlitv that was dis;'* appearing, and informed the police. In Watsons cas'e he would not on any account have entered a oonviction as Watson apparently collected the coal on the road. His Worship pronosed to dispose of the cases under the Justices of the Peace Act and treat the offences as trivial. The informations would be dipmissed. Watson was allowed to take his eoal, but the other quantities were returned to the company. Chief-Detective AVivrd remarked that the prosecution was.tlio outcome pf laxity on the part ot / tho Union Company's officials, because when tho police were present no coal was removed from the wharves.

.UNREGISTERED BARMAID.. Charges of permitting an unregistered barmaid to serve in the bar and' of emPloyms: an unregistered barmaid -were' preferred against Frederick Hilton, proprietor of the National Hotel. Defendant pleaded not guilty. Sub-Inspector Emerson prosecuted, and Mr. P. W. Jackson defended. The prosecution Teminded the Bench tirnt soma time previously Jessie Jackeon had been proser-.uted for king an u'nTeeistered barmaid. . A defect .in the charse had led.to its dismissal without preiudico to a further prosecution. In this action Miss Jackson -would be cbarg*l with aiding and abetting defendant Hilton in permitting an unregistered Tarmaid .to be employed. The defence admitted that Jessie- Jackson was employed as a barmaid, and' that she was in fact an unregistered barmaid. Counsel: We will admit that if th< Policy will admit this: that Sadie M'AlPine is a registered barmaid; that she is a sister of Jessie> Jackson; and that Jessie Jackson used her sister's license to obtain employment st the hotel. The police admitted these points. ' Formal evidence was tlien given' by the police. For the defence in Hilton's case it was submitted that he. had always known Jackson as' M'Alpine, for the reason that she signed her .name as. 3f'Alpine on the wages-sheet. . After hearing the evidence, His. Worship reserved decision. Jackson's case will depend on which way the verdict eoes.

MILITARY DEFAULTERS. For failing to register for military service. James Dawson was fined ,£5, and for a like offence Edward Kerr was fined £i. For failing to render the personal service required of them, Clarence Moore and F. W. Perritt were- each fined £n, ,W. Prince £4, Ernest Humphries, A. C. V. Johnson, and Victor Johnson each £2 lfls.. Harry Feltani £1, and Leo Smith 80s. and 7s. costs. , OTHER GASES, . Walter Kimpton and Fred Radloff denied charces of using threatening behaviour in Tory Street. The"police- evidence was to the effect that tho two men were fiorhting. Both were convicted and fined £2. .. , Henrv Edward Wright came up for sentence-on two charges of theft of clothins- of a total value of .£2O 55., the joint property of Patrick Conavan and Thomas Grcaley. Accused -admitted tho charges He was living with tho two complainants in a boardirigkouse in Molesworth Street, and while, they were away at work he appropriated tho articles, and took them in a sack to the Railway Hotel'. He was there arrested. The. Magistrate remarked that accused was, apparently hot mentally strong; On* the first charge ho would be fined .£5 and cpsts. and on the second count he would be convicted and ordered to come no for sentenco when called upon within twelve months. Time was allowed in which to pay the fine. .--.'. A sentenco of three months' imprisonment was imposed on Annie Johnson, who was charged with keeping a. house of ill-fame and with vagrance. Isa Lee, who was associated with tho woman Johnson, was convicted and ordered to come up for .sentence when called upon. within 'twelve months. ... A fine of £2 and costs was imposed on .Tf.mes Martin, who was found on the licensed premises of the Clyde Quay Hotel when such premises were required to bo closed. .

For _ failinsr to close his shop as per requisition, J. Donnelly, hairdresser, was fined 10s. Two like charges were preferred aeainst H. Paris, fishmonger, of Courtenav Place, who submitted that ho' did not sell fish after 6 p.m., but maintained a cafe after that hour. Defendant had been warned, but in spite of that had continued to keep • his shop mien. On the first count he was fined £\. and on the second chargo £1 and costs.

CIVIL BUSINESS

A MOTOR COLLISION. An Account of a motor collision that occurred on Paekakariki Hill in July last. Percy M'Konzioy Pratt, cabinetmaker, of Hawera, proceeded . against Wm. John C'oombo Maddever, settlor, of Pahiatua. with a claim for X 53 15s. 0(1.' soecial damages and .£2O general damaces. ■' Mr. W. G. Eidtlcll. S.M., heard the case. ... . Plaintiff stated that on July 18, while driving his car from Hawera to Wellington, via Paekakariki Hill, he met defendant's car proceeding in . the opposite direction over the hill. He alleged that bv reason of the negligent and unFkilfiil driving of defendant, defendant's car struck his. and damaged it considerably. Plaintiff's son was also injured as a result of tho collision. Tho defence was that plaintiff was to tiame because ho travelkd up the hill too nuickly. _ Defendant was proceeding down the hill cautiously with his engine, switched off, and as he was negotiating a bond in the road he suddenly met plaintiff's car. Tho road at the noint of collision was very narrow. Defendant did nil ho could to avoid the collision. After hearing tho evidenco Ilis Worshin reserved imlgment. • Mr. T). S. Smith appeared for plaintiff and Mr. T. Young for defendant.