MAGISTRATE’S COURT, HOKITIKA

Hokitika Guardian, 8 July 1921, Page 4

MAGISTRATE’S COURT, HOKITIKA

THURSDAY, JULY 7. AFTERNOON SITTING. (Before H. AV. Bundle Esq., S.M.) The Court sat at 2.15 p.m. RIDING ON FOOTPATH. Borough Inspector (Mr Park) v. JasAVells, a charge of riding on a footpath in Stafford Street. Fined 5/- and costs 7/-. LICENSING ACT. Police v. J. L. Fowler (Mr Murdoch). Adjourned by request of defendant for two weeks.

Same v. Thos Mills.—Adjourned to 25th. July. Same v. J. J. Mclntosh (Mr Wells) Mr Wells asked for an adjournment for two weeks. .Granted. Seven charges against other offenders arising out of the same circumstances were also adjourned. A DEFENDED CASE.

Police v. J. V. Hall (Air Murdoch) a charge of Supplying liquor after hours. Defendant pleaded not guilty. Constable Quinn gave evidence that on 21st. June about 9 p.m. he visited the Occidental hotel. Tn a room opposite the bar found four men, one McCarthy, being not a hoarder, who had a glass of beer in his hand, who said he went into the hotel before 6 p..m. and was supplied with a glass of beer. It was then 9 p.m. and he had only drank about an inch of the liquor. Airs Hall, wife of the licensee said that a hoarder had shouted and she had given the drinks; McCarthy had been in the hotel about a quarter of an hour. The licensee was outside at the time.

To Air Murdoch—All's Hall contradicted McCarthy as soon as witness asked her.

J. Y. Hall licensee gave evidence as to the license and the Ijonrders

Mrs Hall gave evidence that on the 21st. June she was in the bar when a, hoarder came along and asked for four drinks. He said they were all for boarders. Blip gave them to him. Later she heard McCarthy tell the Constable that he got the drink before 6 o’clock. She contradicted this statement at once. The room was a private one used as a nursery by two boarders and their families. McCarthy went out soon after the Constable. She did not know that McCarthy was in the nursery when she supplied the drinks. H<* could not have been in the house for nmre than a quarter of an hout> William fthnnd gave evidence that he was a hoarder at the Occidental Hotel. He had met AlcCartliy near the Town Clock and witness invited him to come and hear him sing a new song ho had bought that day. AlcCartliy came to the hotel to the nursery and witness ordered four drinks to be brought. Alas singing when the Constable came in. Considered he had a right to shout for a guest.

His Worship said the circumstances show that Air Sharnl. a hoarder, invited the man McCarthy into his private room in the hold. The prosecution had failed to substantiate the charge, which would be dismissed. It was the duty of the lodger to give a full and free information at the time so as to assist the police. Tn this case Air Sharnl had failed to give any information to the constable ns to AlcCartliy b<?in«£ liis guest -at the time. ON LICENSED PREAILSES. police v. F. AlcCartliy, a charge of being on licensed premises (Occidental Hotel) during prohibited hours. Charge dismissed oil the tacts ill the previous case, though AlcCartliy was deserving of censure owing to the false information lie bad given to the police. A young mail charged with tieing on licensed premise (Dunedin Hotel) during prohibited hours pleaded not guilty ami after hearing him the information was dismissed.

A young man charged with being on licensed premises (Southland Hotel) after hours did not appear. Fined 25/-, mil cost. 22/-. DEBT CASES.

A. Cedcrman (Mr AVells) v. 0. Lyes (Mr Murdoch) claim £57 19s. .Adjourned to 21st. July on application of, plaintiff, question of costs held over.

Dowell Bros. (Air (Sellers) v. T. .Murphy, judgment summons £7 13s. 6d. order made by consent for payment of Cl per month. Counsel’s foe 15/6 allowed.

Benton and Co. (Air AVells) v. Open Masone claim £l2 Is 2d. Judgment for olainfiff with costs 635. Westland County Council fAIr UarkT v, H. IT. Adamson, claim for £l6 Is 2d, rates due. Judgment for plaintiffs with 'osts £1 Bs. Same v. R. G. Honey claim £3 15s 9d. rates. Judgment for plaintiff with costs 11/-. Hallonstein Bros. (Air Murdoch) v. Open Masone claimed £3 I6s. 3d. Judgment for plaintiff with costs 35s 6d. FRIDAY, JULY Bth. The following cases were hoard yesterday, but the decisions were made available this morning. STAMP \ACT.

The Police charged AV. D. Nolan with having signed a receipt for £5, and with having failed to properly stamp same. (Two charges). Defendant wrote acknowledging his signature to two County Council vouchers.' Convicted and lined 20/- on account of costs on the first charge and 7/- costs on the second.

Same v. H. Scott (Mr Sellers') a similar charge. After hearing the evidence of the County Clerk (Air D. J. Evans') who stated the amount signed for was for ferry service subsidy the information was dismissed.

Same v. Logan AVilson similar charges one for ferry subsidy and one for payment of removal of a house. Evidence was given in this and following eases by the County Clerk as to the nature of the payments. Convicted and fined 20/- on ' account of costs on the first and 71- on the second. Same v. Guy Murray a similar charge a receipt for an amount for clearing a track. Convicted and fined 20/- on account of costs. Same v. L. R. Gibb a similar charge. Constable Drummond who served the summons stated the defendant denied that he bad signed the voucher though the bad received tbe money. Information dismissed.

It was stated that the cost of serving three of the summonses was £l3/8/-.

In giving his decision in the above cases His AVorship said in each case the defence raised was that the money was for wages. The exemption of the Stamp Act was only for wages or salaries. These cases were all for moneys received from the Westland County Council and all were on the border line making it difficult to say whether they were for wages or otherwise. He had, after consideration decided that they were not for wages. In the case of Murray it was a grant, which was exponed in paying wages to himself. Tu Nolan’s ease it was a grant and a subsidy. It was quite clear that he had treated it as wages, but it was not to be so considered. In Wilson’s ease it was a grant for removing a house in from a dangerous position. A conviction would be entered up in each case against Nolan, AVilson and Murray. To fixing tho penalty he thought the authorities should have been fully informed on the cost of serving these summonses which totalled £l3 Bs. The party to be blamed, he thought, was not the defendants who have acted in good faith, but the County Council who shoul have seen the receipts were properly stamped. It was most unreasonable to saddle the defendants with the heavy costs involved in what h ( , considered were trivial cases. It was not right that because they were living in such out of tho way places (Okurn and Bruce Bay) they should have to pay the extremely, heavy costs incurred. Tie would therefore convict in each ease and order Nolan to pay 20s on th 0 first charge and 7s on the second, on account of the cost.of service, AVilson a like amount on the two charges and Murray 20s on account of cost of service. •