MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Hokitika Guardian, 14 September 1922, Page 3

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

THURSDAY, SEPT. 14th. (Before AV. Meldrum Esq., S- M ->

WATERED BUTTER

F. Varney (Mr Park) v. Kokatahi Daily Factory Coy., Ltd., a charge of having sold butter containing more than Hi per cent of water. A plea of guilty was entered. F. Varney nave evidence that he was Inspector under the Sale of Foods and Drugs Act. The maximum allowance of water was 1(1 per cent aiid a sample of the butter sold contained 16.80% of water. The butter was sold by the defendants through a local storekecpei. Convicted and fined £5: costs 19s ,3(1; counsel’s fee £2 2s. LICENSING ACT.

The police charged five young men with being on licensed premises (Keller’s Hotel) during prohibited hours, who did not appear. Eac-b were convicted and ordered to pay costs 7s each. On a similar charge (at Southland lintel) a defendant who did not appear was ordered to pay costs 7s each. Three others similarly charged (Dunedin Hotel) did not appear and were convicted, one being fined 20s and costs 7s and the other two ordered to paycosts 7s each.

The police charged William Hall, license of. Dunedin hotel with -exposing liquor for sale during prohibited hours and ho pleaded guilty. Convicted and fined £5 and costs 7s.

A prohibited resident (for whom Mr Sellers appeared and pleaded guilty was charged with a breach of the order. Convicted and fined 5s and costs 7s.

The police charged K. Bergamiiii with driving a motor car at night without a light. Fined 5s and costs 7s. W. L. Joyce and Sydney Breeze, similarly charged was fined 5s and cost’s 7s. Herbert Spoor was charged with cycling at night without a light. Fined 5s and costs 7s. X. L. Weeniok and E. Hackell, charged with having failed to have the registered mnnlier of a lorry properly displayed, were convicted and fined 5s and costs 7.s each. DEBT CASES. M. McGavan v. G. Curran, claim £lO. Judgment by default with costs 235. McKay and Son., v. T. J. Beityon, claim £1 7s 6(1. Judgment for plaintiffs with costs 7s. F. A. Lynch (Mr Wells) v. A. Ch tbush adjourned claim for possession of tenement. By consent an order was made for possession t.-i lie given by Oth. October. no costs being asked for. POSSESSION OF TENEMENT. IT. A. Thompson (Mr Wells) v. F. ...i-Carthy suit for possession of. tenement. Defendant did not appear. Order made for possession by 21st. Sept, with costs 17s and counsel fee 21s. S. Knowles (Mr Murdoch) v. P. Stephens (Mr Eleoek) claim for £22 8s lial inee of wages. Mr Eleoek’ asked f<qleave to defend, hut this was refused by His Worship. Similar claims were made by H. Knowles for £3 Ids ami by J. M.C.iffery £l9 2s. Evidence was flu’ll taken in support, witnesses to he subject to cross examinations, which was with n view to question the quality’ of the work done. There was also a question of goods supplied for which the defendant could not site under the Trust Act. His Worship gave judgment for plaintiffs in each ease for the amount claimed with costs £8 17s (id.

The Police charged Edward T. Slier, riff (Mr Murdoch) licensee of Blue Spur hotel with selling liquor and exposing liquor during prohibited hours nnd pleaded not guilty. M. Kurnick was also charged with supplying l quor. and E. Brown with being on licensed premises in connection with the above charge. Constable Houston stationed at Riniu stated with Const. Best he visited the hotel at Blue Spur on Sunday at 10.15 a.m. In tile bar saw E. Brown, and a hoarder M. Kurnick, who licit stated he had asked Brown in and had supplied him with a glass of beer. Kurnick stated Mrs Sherrill' had given him authority to serve in her absence, and the latter then came along and stated this was correct.

Const. Best gave corroborative evidence.

Martin Kurnick deposed he was. a hoarder at Blue Spur In tel. Saw Edward Brown come along. He saw he looked white and knowing lie was rn well asked him in to have a iLSuk and tool; him in and gave it to him. Hid no authority from Mr or Mrs Sheriff. A\ itness gave the drink. It was a pure gift. He was in the bar about five minutes when the police came in. To Sergt. McCarthy— AVitness luid not paid for the drink, A FTKR NOON SITTING. The Court adjourned at 1 p.m. and resumed at 2 p.m. -Mrs Sherri(F, wife of the licensee, gave evidence that her little girl ea.me down to the hack of the house ami fold her .Mr Brown was in the front. She did not know he was in flic bar. Her husband had been ill in lied foi several days at the time. N'o one had the right to take the key of the bur and serve anyone with liquor. Did nut know IJrown was in tlic* !>:ir till the police inin** in. Kurnick .supplic 1 the Liquor on his own account without her knowledge.

To the Bench—Kurnick never h-d Ike right to serve in the bar, though he had served in tHo Imr occasionaliv. His AA'orship said in regard to the question of a sale by Hit license, lie did nut feel justified in considering that Kiirnich had been authorised to sell and the charge against the licensee would lie dismissed. As regards Kiirnich supplying liquor, this was, lie considered proved, and ho would he fined £1 and costs 7s. Brown for being unlawfully on the premises would he ordered to pay costs 7s. The police charged a young man with being unlawfully on licensed premises (Keller’s Hotel) during prohibited hours nnd lid pleaded not guilty. After hearing police evidence and that of defendant, his Worship said he could not accept the excuse.. Convicted and fined 20s and i-'-sts 7r. M. Moore (Mr Murdoch) v. I). Dialling (Air Sellers), claim for possession cf tenement-. After hearing evidence an order was made for possession to I - given by Oct. Lltli. Costs C2 (is Gd wen- allowed.