MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Hokitika Guardian, 1 May 1924, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

TIiritSDAV, MAY Ist

(Before IV. Mehlriim, Esq., S.M.) ■ licensing act. Police v. W. J. Giitliberlet (Mr Murdoch) a charge of selling liquor, and exposing liquor for sale during pro--hihited hours, at the Three Mile Hotel on April fitli. A plea of not guilty was entered.

Constable Randall gave evidence on April Bill lie visited the Three Mile hotel and found three men in the bar parlour, the licensee behind the bar and three drinks on the slide, which was in full view. A brother of the licensee stated he anil his inend had been invited in and that the licensee ' had shouted for them. The other man present was a boarder. Constable Best corroborated. tV. .1. Outhherlet. licensee pave evidence that, ho had invited his brother and his friend to come out lor the purpose of visiting the mussel banks. They came out and before leaving witness asked them ot have a drink. This was about .*> o’clock. The police came in while they were having the drink. To Kergt. King: lie did not tell the constables this as they did not ask him. The brother of the licensee gave corroborating evidence. -.

ilis Worship said ii would have been" ~ bolter it the licensee bad given bis explanation to the constables. He saw no reason to ilonbt Ids evidence. The ease would he dismissed and also tho charges against the two men of being unlawfully on the premises.

flic Police charged a resident of Woodstock with being unlawfully on tie* lii'val Mail Hotel. Woodstock, after hours. Mr Murdoch for defendant pleaded not guilty. Constable lkunt' luond gave evidence of finding the defendant on the premises, and that the explanation given was endorsed by the licensee, that lie had "one to arrange for use of a horse. The defendant gave evidence similiar to what he had told the const able. 11 is Worship said he accepted the explanation and considered it was a perfectly lawful one. The case would be dismissed. He also wished to compliment Constable Drummond on tin l fair way be had given

his evidence. WITH Ol*T A UfiHT. The police charged W. Keir with riding a cycle without a light in Novell Street after sundown, fined os and

LICENSING ACT. 'file police charged a prohibited person with being drunk on lvumara racecourse. Killed os and costs 7s. 'flu* police charged four residents with being in Club Hotel after hours. Kuch were ordered to pay 'costs 7s. On the .•iptiTieation of an offender convicted and fined 2Ms and costs 7s at last sitting, for being on licensed premises, it being proved lie was a first offender, the fine was remitted and lie was ordered to pav costs 10s. DEI IT CASKS. K. .fames (.Mr Klcock) v. .1. Tainui claim !_'7 .'is Id. .Judgment for plaintill' with costs C2 Us fid. .). Hayes (.Mr Klcock) v. K. H. •Burley, claim C.'l 2s oil. Judgment. for plaintiff with costs Cl ](>s. Orr Bros (Air Alurdoch) v. W. Senile (Air Klcock) claim for CD all amount in dispute oven* tin* hire of a motor lorry. After hearing evidence it was elicited that the db'iiiie was as to whether the charge should have been for the number of days tin* lorry was in defendant’s possession or the days on which he used it. liis Worship in giving judgment stated lie took the view of the plaintiff as a sensible one that the charge should ho for the days the defendant had possession. Judgment for plaintiff for CD with costs C:3 Ids.