RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, GREYMOUTH.

Grey River Argus, Volume XII, Issue 1181, 11 May 1872, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, GREYMOUTH.

Friday, May 10. (Before W. H. Revell, Esq., R.M.)

William Jone3 was charged with selling bread otherwise than by weight. Mr Perkins appeared for the defendant and pleaded "Not Guilty." Mrs Grandjean stated that on Monday afternoon, 6th inst., she received two

small loaves from the defendant. Within half-an-hour Sergeant White called on her and she gave him the loaf produced. She marked it at the time. By Mr Perkins : I supposed it was a 21b. loaf. I bought it as such. I did not ask to have the' bread weighed, and I don't know that defendant had his scales in the cart. I have not paid for the bread. The account runs on for a month or two. . Sergeant White : I identify the loaf as the one I received from Mrs Grandjean. I paid her 6d for it. Robert Kettle : lam a baker.. I know the difference between plain and fancy bread. This loaf is plain household bread. •By Mr Perkins : I was formerly employed by Mr Jones. After the Act came into force my instructions were to make the 21b. loaf 21b. 30z., and. the 41b. loaf 41b. 6oz. I have often weighed bread after it came out of Jones's oven again to see that- it weighed out full. Sergt. White : The bread was weighed the day after it was seized. It was If oz under weight. A piece has been cut out of the bottom as a mark. Mr Perkins addressed the Court for the defence', pbinting out that the Act . had been complied with. The bread had been weighed before it left the defendant's shop, and the Act did not require bakers to carry round scales with them and weigh it out to each customer so long as it had been weighed in the shop. ,He asked the Magistrate to reserve judgment SS&Wg&Sg'g Me^o^MifrfThe Magistrate concurred, and reserved judgment. Henry Williams, baker, Mawhera Quay, was charged with a similar offence. Mr Perkins appeared for the defence. Frank Jellicoe said : lam in the employ of Mr Williams, and on the 6th inst. delivered bread at Alexander's Hotel in Gresson street. All the bread 1 carry out is generally weighed, but I cannot say I saw it weighed that day. John Spencer, waiter at Alexander's Hotel, Gresson street, Baid : I received ten small loaves from the last witness on Monday last. Some of them were fanny bread, and the others plain bread. He did not weigh it. I did not ask him to do so, and he did not say how many pounds of bread I was receiving. It was admitted that the loaf produced was plain bread, and Constable Keating stated that he received the loaf produced at Alexander's, and had it weighed byJUr Roland Davis", the Inspector of Weights and Measures, the following morning. It weighed two pounds and a quarter of an ounce. (Mr Perkins, objected to jhis evidence, as it had nothing whatever to do with the case, as the defendant was not charged with selling short weight.) . For the defence, Mr Perkins submitted that the master was not bound by the act of his servant in a criminal proceeding, and Mr Williams was not responsible for Jellicoe neglecting to weigh out the bread on delivery. Mr Williams said that the bread supplied to Mr Alexander on this occasion was weighed by him before it went into the oven and after it came out. When it came out each loaf weighed 21b. There was no one present but himself. He was very particular since the Act came into force, and the statement of the constable that the bread was over weight was proof that what he said was correct." . The Magistrate said the charge was not one of short weight, and the only point in the case was whether the bakers were compelled to carry round with them "scales, and weigh out each loaf on delivery. On that he had been asked to give a decision. Mr Perkins said the bakers in town wished it to be stated by the Bench whether the weighing of the bread in the shop before going out was not sufficient to comply with the Act.

The Magistrate said he would moat certainly reserve judgment on the point in the meantime. Thomas Gleeson was then charged with a similar offence, by selling a loaf otherwise than by weight on the 6th May to John Osborne, in Hospital street. During the hearing of this case it appeared that the loaf, which was seized by the police, was" not sold to the witness, but had been left at his place for another person. On this point the case broke down, and was withdrawn. Thomas Moutray, baker, Hospital street, was charged with a similar offence on the 7th inst. Bridget .O'Loughlan stated that she- lived at the Dan O'Connell Hotel, and on the 7th instant received a loaf from W. Macdonald, the defendant's servant. It was not weighed at the time of delivery, as witness did not ask him to do so. It was afterwards given to Constable Flannagan at his request. Wm. M'Donald proved the delivery of the. bread as stated, and said that it was the practice of his employer always to weigh the bread when it came oat of the

oven, and it was given to him full weight to deliver. . He carried no scales round in his cart. ' Constable Flan- ; nagan said he received the loaf produced from last witness, and had- it weighed the. following morning by the Inspector of Weights and Measures. It was If oz short of 21bs. R. Davis proved the weighing of the loaf by the standard weights. The defendant said he weighed all his bread : before going into the oven, and also after it came out. except fancy bread, and. he believed the loaf in question was! Sb : weighed; but bread loses weight by becoming, stale during the night, and this loaf was not weighed until the morning af cer it was seized. William Jones, baker, Mackay street, was called, and proved that bread lost weight according to the state of the weather. He had known a loaf to lose i of a pound in six hours if it was exposed to a dry wind. How much the loaf lost in weight all depended upon whether the weather was wet or dry. In fine weather a loaf would at least lose 2oz weight in 24 hours.

In all these cases judgment was reserved until Monday, and other cases against Jellicoe and M 'Donald, as servants of Williams and Moutray, were adjourned. INFORMATIONS BY INSPECTOR OF WEIGHTS MEASURES. • ' Thomas Gleeson, baker, charged on the information of Roland Davis, Inspector of Weights and Measures, with having in his possession on the 6th May one unstamped and broken weight, and four unjust weights, but which were stamped. Mr Newton asked the Inspector to produce his appointment. Mr Davis said that he had been in Court hundreds of times but had never, been asked to produce his appointment. If insisted upon . the case would have to be adjourned. The Magistrate overruled the pointy and after some further argument as to the production in Court of the standard weights, the defendant was fined Ll and costs. George Martin was charged by the Inspector with selling 12 sacks of coal by measure and not by weight. Charge admitted, defendant stating that his scales and weights were carried away" by the" great flood. He .had ordered others, but had not yet received them. Fined Ll and costs. . . Robert Wilson was charged with a similar offence. Charge admitted, the defendant stating that he had only lately bought in to the business,- and the Inspector had not been to the district since. He thought it was the duty of the Inspector to come to him, and not for him to take his scales to the Inspector. Fined Ll and costs. — The same defendant was also charged with having in his possession a platform- weighing machine, the same being in a broken and defective condition. The charge, was admitted, the defence being similar to that in the last case, and the defendant was fined Ll and costs.

ASSAULT. Augustus Hildebrand v. — Edwards. — A charge of assault and battery on Preston road on the 3rd inst., and a request that the defendant should be bound over to keep the peace. It appeared that as plaintiff was driving a cow, defendant's dog caused it to run into the lagoon. Plaintiff threw a stick at the dog, and hit it across the back. Defendant invited the plaintiff to come off his horse! and settle the matter on the spot,; and when he refused to do so, threw his, wet hat in plaintiff's face, knocking the pipe out of his mouth, and using some very strong language. It further appeared that there had^ been frequent quarrels between the parties as to their pigs, dogs, &c, as their paddocks were adjoining. The Magistrate said he. did not see any reason why the defendant should be bound over to keep the peace, and for the assault he would be fined Is and oosts of Court, but professional costs would not be allowed.