DOMINION ITEMS.

Hokitika Guardian, 27 May 1930, Page 5

DOMINION ITEMS.

A COUNCIL BREEZE

(Bv Telegraph—Press Association)

CHRISTCHURCH, May 27

Only four (ity Councillors partool °1 the Mayor’s hospitality at suppei alter the Council’s meeting last nigh; owing to a “breeze” during the busi ness done in committee.

■ The trouble was caused through the carrying of a motion by Councillor Armstrong earlier in the evening, that a committee be set up to ascertain tne views of Council employees on the question of introducing, a forty hour week.

Certain Councillors, it is understood were told by Mayor Archer that he did not wish them to lie his guests that night.

INDEPENDENT CANDIDATURE

WATROA, May 27,

Eustace Lane of Wairoa’ lias announced himself as an Independent Labour candidate for Napier seat at die next General Election.

BREAD AND WATER DIET,

CHRISTCHURCH, May 27.1 Charged before Magistrate Mosley with attempting to escape from Addington Reformatory while a prisoner there, and with breaking a window, Doris May Adams, aged 22, was convicted and sentenced to bread and water for three days. The Matron said the accused had hidden a hammer iu her cel].

A CHARGE DISMISSED.

CHRISTCHURCH, May 27. William Thomas, alias John McDon-

ald, alias Mathew, alias May, aged 37, described as a printer, and native of England, was charged: ‘‘That on April 30th. 1930 at Christchurch, without lawful authority, he made upon a plate, something apparently intended :o resemble a bank note.”

Police evidence was to the effect that a constable went to the Racecourse Hotel, Riccarton for the purpose of making inquiries about .accused. He took possession of a box containing many articles and papers. In the box were two pieces of cardboard, a sflialler box resembing a printing frame with the figure “5.”. Another 'printing frame with type for printing, resembling the printing on the back of a new bank of New South Wales £5 note. A copy of a£s note with an explanatory note was also in the box. A bank accountant evidenced that the note was a poor imitation, and more suitable for use as an advertising stunt than anvthing else.

The Afagistrate held there was insufficient evidence, and dismissed the charge.