MAGISTRATE'S COURT HOKITIKA

Hokitika Guardian, 30 March 1922, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT HOKITIKA

THURSDAY, MARCH 30th

(Before Wm. Meldrum Esq., S.M.)

LICENSING ACT

The Police charged two men, who did not appear, with being found on licensed premises (All Nations Hotel, Rinui) during prohibited hours. Convicted and fined 20s and costs 7s each. NOXIOUS WEEDS. Inspector of Weeds (Mr W. Scott) v. Frederick Howard, junr. (Mr Wells), a charge of failure to cut ragwort on farm at Kokatahi. Mr Wells for defendant, pleaded guilty. Convicted and fined £1 and costs 7s. WANDERING STOCK. County Ranger, IV. Thomson (Mr Park) v. 1L Wliilev, a charge of allowing two cattle to wander on Kokatahi read. Fined os and costs 20s 9d. Same v. J. Howat, 2 steers at Arthurstown. Convicted and fined ss, and costs 20s 9d. Sarnie v. W. O’Connor (Mr Wells) 1 cow at Rimu. Fined 5s and costs 20s 9d. A second charge on the same beast was withdrawn. Same v. Wm McCormick, 1 steer at Rimu. Convicted and fined 5s and costs 20s 9d.

DEBT CASES. Hokitika Harbor Board v. C. Gibbons (Mr Sellers). The Secretary (Mr Borton) stated the amount had been paid. Mr Sc liters stated that lie had paid in two years’ rates with interest, a further amount of arrears being claimed, anil he had not received notice that the amount paid in had been accepted in full settlement. He claimed an appearance fee. Mr Borton stated lie had told defendant personally that the amount had been accepted in settlement. C. Gibbons denied that lit- had received any word whatever of discontinuance. The Court granted counsel defendant £1 Is appearance fee. Hokitika Harbor Board v. J. T. Timpson, claim £2 0s lOd rates due. Judgment for plaintiffs with costs 15s. M. Cnshmaii (Mr Murdoch) v. M. Rochford claim £7 8s 6d. Judgment for plaintiff with costs 19s. An order for immediate execution was also made on the application of counsel, after hearing the plaintiff. JUDGMENT SUMMONS. Robert Wells v. Alex Muir, judgment summons, £l4 5s Od. Oruor made foi payment of £2 per month, in default 1 1 days’ imprisonment, first payment to he made within seven days. WINE LICENSES. w. C. Braddon, for wine makers license, 1000 gallons.—Granted. j |{. Douglas, for wine makers license, 2000 gallons. —Granted. ALLEGED THEFT. Police v. Percy Cut-hush and Phillip Duncan, a charge that on 26th Fob., 1922. they did break and enter the premises of W. Westbrook and steal the sum of £ls. Mr Sellers for Cutbush. Sergt King said he was prepared to reduce the charge to one of theft. Mr Sellers (for Cutbush'.) objected to the reduction of the charge. The charge against Phillip Duncan was then taken, lie being charged with theft of £ls. Defendant pleaded guilty Sergt King asked lean? to amend-the date to 19th Feb. Sergt King stated that defendant’s share of the theft was £7 10s, vhieli had since been repaid. His Worship'asked for a report from the Probation Officer. AN INDICTABLE CHARGE.

Percy Cutbusli (Mr Sellers) was then o'urged with breaking and entering and theft of £ls, the property of AY. Westbrook.

Phillip Duncan, 19 years of age, deposed lie resided at Gibson Quay. On Fell. 19th (a Sunday morning) he met Mr Westbrook near bis shop and till? latter in reply to a question said be was going to church. Witness then went down Revell Street and picked up Frol Glass by arrangement made three or four days before, to visit Wfestlmiok’s shop. Saw Glass in Reach Street. Then went up the bench to the back entrance of Westbrook’s shop. In Reach street saw Cutbush and < him they were going up to Westbrook’s shop. Had also told him a couple of days before that they were going up to Westbrook’s shop. Cutbusli said “Yes, go in.” Cutbusli followed up the beach to the corner of n fence near Westbrook’s back entrance. No remark was made as to watching. (Rafts was with witness, and went into the shop vitli him. Glass and witness forced the door. Glass and witness first wont into the bedroom. Took a quantity of silver coins off the table. Then went into tnc shop, bthind the counter to the cash box. Glass opened it and took ou some pound notes and papers. Witness and Glass each took some. They thfen left the shop and met Cutbush about 20 yards out on the beach from the bnc v fence. The three went down the beat* i together. Cutbush asked Glass for some money and lie replied he did not get much. Cutbush and witness then went further clown the bench to a log where Cutbush asked witness for some money. Witness gave him £- Ms. ,Cutbush said be would like some more. They separated after that. On Tues-day-following the 19. h, Mr We« Took called at Ids house. Told Westbrook what he knew about the matter. As far as ho knew witness hail about £7 l()s which had been paid hack. To Mr Sellers. —Cutbush did not break and enter. He was not on the premises al all and did not steal tin money. This was the ease for the police. Defendant pleaded “Not guilty, ami resented Ids defence. His Worship committed defendant for trial at the next sittings of the Supreme Court. Rail was allowed in £SO and one surety of 950.