RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Grey River Argus, Volume IX, Issue 649, 17 March 1870, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wednesday, March 10, (Before W, H, Eevell, Esq., R.M.) INFORMATIONS UNDER THB WEIGHTS AND MEASURES ACT, Inspector of Measures v. James Jones, Stoney Lead. — A charge of having in his possession one pint measure and four halfpint measures unstamped. The defendant did not appear. . The informant proved his case, and a penalty of \% was inflicted, . with costs: ; { - ;; 7 ■'•■■- ■'■■■- , Same v. Richard Skogjund, Stoney Lead, — A charge of having in possession uniust and unstamped weightsi and scales/ and two measures. He admitted the offence, but pleaded that he had taken no notice pf them, Fined LI and costs, Same v, Peter White, Stoney Lead.-—* Charge of having. in his possession one vm.just and unstamped spring balance. 'The' defendant stated th^t twelve months ago he sent this balance to the Inspector, aticl it was returned to him. The Inspector denied ever having had it in his posses* sion. Fined LI and costs. , Same v. Maigaret Macaulay, Stoney Lead. — A similar charge with regard to six measures unstamped. The defendant plpaded ignorance of the law. She ha 4 bought them in town about six weeks ago. Fined 10s and costs, Same v. Rae and Haworth. — Charge of having possession of one weighing-machine and six weights nnjust and unstamped. The Inspector stated, that a week previous to the seizure, he called the attention of the storeman to the fact; but no notice was taken of it, and he went and seized them. Mr Perkins appeared for the de» fen dan t, and in crossrexamination, witness said the weighing-machine and weights might possibly have been in his possession in 1868, but to the best of his belief they were not ; but they had not been since the new Act came into operation in Jan., 1869. Mr Perkins said he might have applied for a dismissal of the information, on the ground that the offences were. placed in one, bat he had a good answer to the charge. Mr Rae said the weights and balance were sent to the Inspector's office, and were paid for, and re*. turned. He called John Monks, who was in the defendant's employ, About eighteen months ago he toot tho balance and weights to Mr Davis's, office. They were with him two or three days, when he was Bent back for them, Mr Davies then said he had not got some-* thing he required for stamping them, but said they were quite correct and could be. taken away if paid for. He paid 2s 6d op 3s, and took the balance and weights b?cfc to Mr Rae. The Inspector stated that the balance was still incorrect, and he ha 4 the same standard weights now as he had two jears ago. The Bench were of opinion that the measures and weights had been sent to the Inspector's office, returned, and the fees paid. The case would be dismissed, the weights and measures to be sent to the office, stamped, and returned to the owner on the required fees being paid. The Inspector said they would rey main in his possession. The Magistrate : The order of the Bench is that they be stamped and returned by you. The Inspector : With all respect for the Bench/ they are in my possession, and it rests with me to dear with them. Same v. Ann Keysar, Stoney Lead.r— Charge of having one scale and 13 unjust" and unstamped weights ia her possession. The defendant pleaded ignorance of the law. The Inspector asked for a remission of the fine, as the defendant was a poor woman. Fined LI and costs, but the articles to be stamped and returned. The; Inspector repeated the statement he made in the last case..