LICENSING ACT.

King Country Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 378, 15 July 1911, Page 5

LICENSING ACT.

MORE TECHNICAL BREACHES. INCREASED FINES. At le Kuiti Magistrate's Court, before Mr F. O'B. Loughnan, SM., and Messrs Cornish and Floyd, J.P's., A. L. Higgins (Mr Findlay), of Pirongia, was charged with failing to notify the Clerk of the Court of the. despatch of two bottles of whisky into the King Country. Being a first offence, he was fined Is and costs, the offence having been committed previous to an occasion when the Magistrate had let off a number of other offenders. On two further charges of supplying a half-caste with liquor, defendant pleaded not guilty, holding that while he had suppied Henry W-dc, Wade was not a half-caste. Constable Mathew deposed he had always looked on Wade as a half-caste. Henry Wade, of Kawhia, said his father's father was a European and his father's mother was a quadroon. The Court went exhaustingly into the genealogy of defendant, and after discussing what arithmeticians call vulgar fractions, announced that Wade must be 11-16ths native and h-16ths white. The charges against Higgins we~e dismissed. Henry Wade, for procuring liquor i was fined 80s and costs two \ charges, with costs, a total of £3 14s. Mrs Gibbons, Taihape (Mr Sharpies) was charged with not notiliyng the Clerk of the Court of the despatch of liquor. Mr Sharpies said that on her first offence under the new Act, the Magistrate had commented on the excellent -banner in which her books were kept. She had sent notice to the Clerk of the Court atTaumarunui, and thought that was sufficient. The Magistrate said defendants were failing to carry out the wording of the Act —words put there in order to give the Clerk of the Court control over liquor coming into the King Country. He had warned offenders again and again that they would be fined if they did not comply with the Act, and he intimated an ascending scale of fines making them heavier and heavier for repeated breaches of the law. He fined defendant £2 and costs. E. B. Dufaur, of Auckland (Mr Finlay), was charged on two charges with sending notices to the wrong Clerk of the Court. Mr Findlay said defendant had written out the notices himself, but a clerk thought he knew better, and altered the destination from Te Kuiti to Ohakune. The Magistrate said that if defendant's clerk would not obey instructions, defendant had better get another clerk. On the first occasion he had dismissed the defendant, on the second occasion he had fined him £2. On this, the third occasion, he proposed to fine him £3 and costs on each charge. John Endean, of Auckland (Mr Finlay), for sending notice to the wrong court pleaded gulity, and was fined £2 and costs.

Mrs P. Trevethick, trading as J. Wendall and Co., Auckland (Mr Finlay), for omitting to supply the Clerk with the address to which liquor was sent, was fined £2 and costs, the Magistrate, in reply to the contention of defendant's solicitor that defendant had seriously tried to carry out the requirements of the Act, saying that they were ail honest attempts to comply. W. J. Kuhtze, brewer, Taihape, for wrongly diiecting his notice, was fined £1 and costs, this being a first offence. * D. J. Maloney, of Stratford, for failing to furnish the address of person supplied was dismissed with a caution, it being a first offence, and a3 he had evidently asked for precise instruciton and been misinformed at Stratford. John Kelly (Mr Finlay), on a first offence of failing to send notice to correct court was fined £1 and costs. H. B. Tucker and Tucker Bros., of Palmerston North Mr Finlay), on four charges of breaches of the Act. admitted through their solicitor that all 'the charges were correct, but asked that the cases be set down for hearing at Palmerston tforth. They had written the Minister of Justice pointing out the difficulty there wa3 in finding out to which court notice should be sent. If heard at Palmerston that would notify the whole district, their object in asking for a change of hearing being for the purpose of enlightening the people cf Palmerston as to the whole position. It was contended that King Country papers did not circulate in other districts, and defendants had no means of knowing what were breaches of the Act. The Magistrate said tnere could be no argument as to the facts of the CBSes, only in mitigation. These people have all to be proceeded against by the Clerk of the Court who originally gave notice. If he (the Magistrate) gave way, and altered the hearing of the cases, the Clerk of the Court would be continually travelling about the country on such prosecutions. It would be manifestly greatly inconvenient. If he granted one, he would have to grant all. If one got it, another would claim it, and if not granted they would complain that the administration of justice was partial. He could not grant the application, and fined H. B. Tucker on two charges £1 and costs, dismissing a third charge, and Tucker Bros. £1 and costs on one charge. John Morrison, Auckland (Mr Finlay), was charged with sending an informal notice. It was a first offence and involved supplying an old friend, a medical man in Te Kuiti, with a special brand of liquor for medicinal purposes. He was fined £1 and costs.