MAGISIRATE'S COURT, HOKITIKA

Hokitika Guardian, 17 November 1921, Page 3

MAGIS IRATE'S COURT, HOKITIKA

THURSDAY. NOV. 17th. (Re j i >ie Win. Meldriim Esq.. S.M.) DEFENCE ACT. Police v. 1. Scott, a charge of failure to attend cadet parades. Convicted and lined cost ol court 7». Same v. A. Deviscovi, failure to attend Territorial parades. Excuse accepted and case dismissed. Same v. L. Jones, a similar charge, i-ihivieled ami lined costs ol court is. LICENSING ACT. All offender charged with being found drunk on 10th Nov. pleaded guilty and was convieU'd and lined cost ol court 2s and cost of treatment 2Ss. An offender previously prohibited charged with procuring liquor, was convicted and lined 2'is and costs is. DEBT CASES. Farrow Bros v. Diggers Sawmill Coy. claim" 92(H). Evidence in this case had been heard at Reefion and argument at {:t i-ymoilth. Plaintiff’s were mni-suitcd with costs L' 1 1 10s. Hokitika Shipping Coy '-Mr Bark) v. p. Cutbush, claim. Cl .'is Id. Judgment for plaintiff' with costs Bs. Robinson and Son v. R. Macklot, -MHouston and Cm subdebtor. The sum of L'S 7s 9d had been paid by sub-debtor into Court. Order made for payment of amount paid into Court.

. WEIGHING COAL. Inspector ol Weights (W. Carter) v. T. Stopl'orth (Mr Murdoch) a charge ol | selling coal without it being weighed. Plaintiff gave evidence that an employee of defendant was delivering coal ami admitted that it had not been weighed. Later saw defendant’s soli who said the coal had not been weighed, though he had intended to instruct j the employee to weigh it, hut had fail-j ed to do so. j Defendant gave evidence that he had j given general instructions to his men | To weigh all coal, and this was tile- | general course followed. The employee who had carted the coal, had | boon engaged carting limber. The cm- 1 ployec (Lovett) also gave evidence as to delivery of the order. This was the j fust time lie had delivered coal and ho | did not know that the coal had to I"' , we jelled. He took the order on the telephone and delivered it on Ins own initiative. He had later weighed a similar hag of coal In that delivered mid found it over s|hs ovci weight. | llis Worship said he did not think this was J, ease lor conviction. The charge would lie dismissed. 1 PURE FOODS ACT. Health Inspector v. G. Conning (Mr .Murdoch) a charge of selling milk euni turning less than -L', per cent id milk fat. Sei'gt King prosecuted. j Mr Murdoch held that the proceed-j ings had been wrongly instituted, in , accordance with tho terms of the Act. His Worship said he would take tune to consider the point. Meantime he; would hear the evidence. The tacts of the case were admitted, including that ol the analysis w. Conning gave evidence that m' was dairy inspector for the district. The analysis shows 9.09 per cent ot solids, Hie nearest to the standard hat had come before the Court. 1 ice wire only two cows milking and there was a shortage of milk that mornings j milking following a wet day and night, iTo this- lie put the poor test. \A hen pouring out a quantity of m.lk 10, j customers, he had not agitate, .1, , i t|„. result that the best ol the milk was poured out, leaving what was poorer milk behind, Horn which the : Inspector took Ids sample, j Decision was reserved, i The Court adjourned at 12.15 p.m.