DOMINION ITEMS.

Hokitika Guardian, 19 February 1926, Page 1

DOMINION ITEMS.

f 11Y TF./.KGItAPIT —I'EU rll ESS ASSOCIATION.] MEATWORKS SALK. WELLINGTON, Kelt. it. A. large number of letters have appeared ill the Wellington newspapers discussing the Government's refusal lo grant a meat export killing license io enable the Wellington .Meal Export Company's works lo he sold to liorthwc ks. Some of the shareholders ask why they should not la* allowed to g**| tun ol the position uith the loss of all lull eight shillings in the 1' of tincapital they subscribed, instead of being forced to continue this season with the prospect of losing everything. It is understood that strong efforts have been made to get the .Minister of Agriculture to recede from his original decision. Hie suggestion being made thal Thomas Unrthwirk and Sens would he willing to complete the purchase if a license were issued with reasonable conditions to protect lily interest. which the Government lias in mind in its complete reins::!. No concession has been scoured, ami it is expected that nothing can be done except to petition Parliament when the I session opens, asking for inquiry and | redress. IN (,) L I'hST AT KAtKoriiA. KAIKOHIA. Eeli. If. The body ol Andrew Alexander Hibson, who was drowned in the t larenec River on I-cR-iiary !) was: reentered i Constable l».vrne on Monday, an ; brought lo the Clarence icsorve station where an innne-t was held, before Mr A. 11. Clark. Acting Corot..-r. and :i jury. Evidence was given by I bulgin' Mein, deceased’s mate, who described how Cib-wu made an attempt m ermine river to secure a horse, and by Constable Byrne regarding the recovery of liic i) >,iy. about nine miles from where dcccasi d had entered li e i ivcr. The jury returned the lolio.ving verdict :—”Thul deceased caiiie by In death through drowning in the ( !nrcitco River while attempting to cm-* V,lien tin- l-iv. r was in Hood on !•••! - ruary !).” The jury found that no blame v. uiluchahh* to anyoue, and consider,-1 that .Mein had in-led wisely in inn - i!»,*• into (lie liver while it was 'ugh and dirty, as lie would probably have shared ihc same fate. PEcri.iAi; position ix appeab CASE. A I’CK I. AN I). Eeb. 17. An unusual situation arose in an appeal r:i'-r which came la-lore Air Justice llordniun in i he Supreme Court. Hie Magistrate. .Mr Pnyiiion, who ■ decision was njipealcd again-t. having lost his notes of evidence taken at Ihr ] tearing. Arnioret Louis l-Teiiry, inspector under the l-’ood and Drugs Ac! (Mr ]Mcredith'l, was the ap|K-llant. and Shaw hires.. Ilowiek (Mr Armstead'), respondents. Shaw Bros, were charged before Mr Povninu in July. 1925, with having sold to the i:is|icctor milk that was below the standard ol milksolids. The circumstances .-w related by Mr Meredith were that Shaw Bros., who are milk vendors, own a farm which was last year carried on bv a married couple named Sutcliffe. (til tile occasion of the purchase Sutcliffe was absent, and his wife made the sale. The defence offered by Shaw Bros, was that Mrs Kitlclific had no contractual relations with them and had no authority to sell, and I beret,, re defendants were not responsible ior ad . The Magistrate acc-plcd that (Jpl’oik.o :i!i<l (li»rnis'St‘«l tin* case.

Alter argumeiit His Honour ret or red the case lan k lo lhe Magistral,- for evidence. Mr Mcivtlitl. : !Mv still crumnr it I suppose lit* will 1** lo recall liic witnesses ? i lis I lonour . I •upposc he will. HUSBAND’S INTEREST IN WIFE’S PROPERTY. WIT UNO DM. Feb. 17. • I udgntei.i was given i hi-; nun-mug in i lu> Sup rein, -<'■ * 111 1 by Mr Jn-iiic Al-jH-rs in a civil act ion Brough! b-, John Reginald Sam,,; against In- wile. FBuMay Saul os. a king for a d.-tinii Mu of plain titf’s ini crest in properties --landing in hi- wife's nein,-. M'r .111-.!,,- A! pers -aid both parii-s had w„rl;.*d. the wife beeping a iilililher of boarders. Tic- hu baud na- honest. a hard-working, iair-miinl* d man. Apparently the pair ,mill nc.i agree. 11l \'iew of all Ibe fir- uni-: an, : " husband was ,*• i(i 1 !, ■< I lo a declnra I ion (hat he had an >nl•*:-<*'(. in ih* |•!'•>- perfies standing in his wil<- s' natno. .liisi bo would 1,,* done if a declaration were made that the ha-band - ii• l o t-, -- ( was L'goO. accused m\n missing M'CKLAND. F"b. W. --The bird ha- flown." _ dm la red Chief Dclceti-ee < un:':du • in Ib - Ulice Court, thi- afiern,.on, when RegPhillips (Ml- Wards f'Bh-d I" make his appearance when his name was raiii'.l for the sccoin! time during th,- dav. Phillip--, who is *.m> of a trio of molt charged v. ilk i'--e i hei'l of benzine ai T.-iupo, was out on hail ol £t?*,o. v. ilh an additional surety of -ET-Th Ili« name was the first called in Hie morning when Air Ward asked that I lie matter slmiild he held in abeyance tiuiil after the luncheon adjoiirnniciit. Mr V. ai d said Hint when ho was bailed. Phillips left for Wanganui, whore his people lived, lie understood that he was to have motored hack to Auckland, so that his non-appearance might possibly be explained by a break-down ol Ills motor. Counsel had sent a telegram of inquiry to Wanganui and expecf.-ai to have a reply by the allernonin Magistrate ' Boynton accordingly granied the adjoiirmneuf. When the cast- was called in the afternoon. AI r Ward said ihai had i* eeivod a Iclegrarn from Wangauu which stated (hat Phillips had IdT on Monday. He was sniipo'i-d lo he re turning to Auckland. (.In ike anplii alion of Detective ( ummings the .Magistrate then jssned warraui for the arrest of I’liilliam: ordered that Steps should no taken recover the bail. The missing mail’s two companion-. Tbntnre Smith, and Janies M '-yuo. who *.vore unable |o find the necessary sun: to seen re tin-ir r'-10.-i'c on bail. wi*nbroilgiii bel’m-i* the Conn and ivinantleo \i* atodicalion ly S.niin t-:r a ,('dnii ion of his bail was refused.