Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MAGISTRATE’S COURT HOKITIKA

THURSDAY, APRIL ISth. (Before Wm. Meldmm Esq., S.M.) LICENSING ACT. An application for a prohibition order which was objected to by Mr Sellers for the defendant, which had been adjourned to this sitting was struck out, the applicant not appearing. Three residents of Rimu charged with being on licensed premises (Commercial Hotel Rimu) during prohibited hours, did not appear and were convicted and ordered to pay costs 7s each. A resident of Hokitika for whom Mr Wells appeared and pleaded not guilty was charged with being on licensed premises (Dominion Hotel) during prohibited hours on April Ist 10.10 p.m. Defendant gave evidence that he went with a boarder to discuss business matters at the request of the latter. His Worship accepted the explanation and dismissed the information. The Police charged another local resident (for whom Mr Wells appeared) with being on licensed premises (Dominion Hotel). Evidence was given of business matters engaging the attention of defendant at the time. Information dismissed. The Police charged a resident with being on licensed premises (Post Office Hotel) after hours. Defendant (for whom Mr Seller’s appeared) gave evidence as to having meals at the hotel. His Worship held that- it was not neces-

sary to stay at the hotel as long as he did, nearly three hours after going for teai. Convioted and ordered to pay costs 7s.

JUVENILE COURT. Three juvenile offenders charged with riding bicycles without a light after hours were convicted and ordered to pay costs 78 each. ARMS 'ACT. The Police charged Patrick J. Keenan, of Riimi with being in possession of a double barrelled gun, that had not been registered under the Arms Act. Sergt. King stated this and a number of other persons were being charged under the Anns Act with being in possession of firearms unregistered, for a period of one month. Constable Houston produced an application by Keenan to register an unregistered gun. To His Worship—Tliere was no attempt to conceal the fact that he had a gun.

Sergt King said he did not want to press for a penalty. It wan simply to give publicity to the necessity for registering firearms. It appeared to be simply carelessness on the part of the owners. It was the first prosecution in this district under the Arms Act.

His Worship said the Legislature took a serious view of the firearms question. He would treat these cases an first offenders. Defendant would be convicted and ordered to pay costs 7s. George J. McLeod similarly charged, pleaded.guilty and stated he had given the information to the Constable. It was simply neglect to register on his

part. Convicted and ordered to pay costs 7s. Same v. Wm H. Knowles, 2 fowling pieces and a Winchester rifle. A similar case. Convicted and ordered to pay costs 7s. Same v. Samuel Godfrey. 1 repeating rifle and fowling piece. Similar case. Convicted and ordered to pay costs 7s. Same v. Alex Jamieson, a single barrelled fowling piece. A similar position. Convicted and ordered to pav coslr 7s. BOROUGH BYE LAWS. The police charged Walter Wallace with riding a bicycle on 4th April at 10.20 p.m. without a light. Convicted and fined 5s and costs 7s. Grace Cunningham. Maurice Connolly, similarly charged were fined 5s and costs 7s. Robert Elliott charged with riding without a light and further with riding on a footpath, did not appear and was convicted and fined .5s and costs 7s on the first charge and ordered to pay costs 7s on the second charge.

Borough Inspector (Mr Park) charged Robert Oit with riding without a light after sunset and with riding on a footpath. Fined 5s and costs 7s on the first charge and ordered to pay costs 7s on the second charge. Same v. Ethel Orr. similarly charged was fined 5s and costs 7s and on second charge ordered to pay costs 7s. Same v. A. Parkin’ll, riding without a light. Fined os and costs 7s. Same v. Albert Marks, riding on footpath. Fined 5s a.nd costs 7s. Same v. N. Houston, riding without a light. Fined 5s and costs 7s. Same v. R. Haussmann, riding without a light. Fined 5s and costs 7s. Same v. E. Hackell, riding without a light. Fined 5s and costs 7s. Some v. B. Breeze, riding without a light. Fined 5s and costs 7s. Same v. Wm. Stickle, riding without a light. Fined 5s and costs 7s. Same F. J. Andrews, riding without a light. Fined 5s and costs 7s. WANDERING CATTLE.

Borough Inspector (Mr Park), v. F. W. Tliompson, a charge of allowing a horse to wander. Fined 5s and costs 7s.

Same v. J. Peake, a horse wandering. Fined 5s and costs 7s. Same v. Tlios Stopforth, 2 horses. Fined 5s and costs 7s. Same v. Thos Staines, 1 eow. Fined 5s and costs 7s. Same v. Jas Duncan, 1 horse. Fined 5s and costs 7s. Same y. Maurice Connolly, 1 cow. Fined 5s and costs 7s. Same v. A. Appleton, 1 cow, Fined 5s and costs 7s. DEBT CASES. Commissioner of Crown Lands (Mr Park) v. R. G. and A. W. Honey, claim ,018. Judgment by default with costs £3 5s 6d. * W. Jeffries and Co. v. L. Martin, claim £1 10s. Judgment for/ plaintiff with costs 19s. W. JefFries and Co. v. E. A. Solomon claim £5 19s fid. Judgment by default less amount paid into Court, with costs 15s. WINE MAKERS LICENSE. J. Mandl and Co., application for a wine makers license, exceeding 1000 gallons.—Granted.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19220413.2.7

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 13 April 1922, Page 1

Word count
Tapeke kupu
920

MAGISTRATE’S COURT HOKITIKA Hokitika Guardian, 13 April 1922, Page 1

MAGISTRATE’S COURT HOKITIKA Hokitika Guardian, 13 April 1922, Page 1

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert