S.M. COURT.

King Country Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 484, 20 July 1912, Page 5

S.M. COURT.

TAUMARUNUI—WEDNESDAY.

Before Mr F. O'B. Loughnan, S.M

ADULTERATED MILK

At the S.M. Court, Taumarunui, on Wednesday, A. Miles, dairyman, waß nrosecuted for selling milk containing 35 per cent, of added water. The defendant pleaded guilty through Mr Short, his solicitor, but as the case was one of much gravity the Magistrate decided to hear the evidence of Mr A. J. Parker, public analyst, who was in court.

After detailing the manner of recipt of sample from the inspector of foods and drugs, Mr Bennett, and the result of the analysis, Mr Parker was asked if the eating of watery food (such as roots, etc)., could affect the quality of the milk, he said it would not.

The magistrate pointed out to defendant that tbe adultration was of a very serious nature, if only through if-.a danger to child life, independent of its absulute dishonesty. Defendant was liable to a fine of £2OO. Though a grave offence it was his first one, defendant would therefore be fined £lO and £7 10s costs.

SHORT-WEIGHT BREAD,

Arthur Corringham, baker, Taumarunui, pleaded guilty to selling shortweight bread to A. P. Bennett, inspector of food and drugs, and was ,fined £1 and £1 costs. I

Wm. E. Stevenson, baker, Taumarunui, for selling short-weight bread to the same person, pleaded guilty, and said his shortness in weight was due to a new oven, and that it was an unfortunate coincidence that the inspector should appear on the scene at that time.

His Worship said it was thoughtless of the inspector to appear at such an embarrassing time, but pointed out that he had been convicted and fined - £lO on a previous occasion for a similar offence. The inspector had weighed seventeen loaves, all of which were underweight, some to the extent of sozs and the average worked out at 3fozs on each loaf of the seventeen. His Worship, continuing, said : "I don t know what to do with you. I have fined you and it seumi no good. (There was an impressive silence for a few moments, and defendant looked anxious). Well, I will fine you £lO and costs £l, which eased the anxious look on defendant's face. A baker doing a fair business and giving short weight can lay by a nice little insurance found to meet contingencies such as this,. and still come out to the good. What about the consumer? Oh, well; he pays, I suppose, for the insurance.—Own Correspondent.

TE KUITI—THURSDAY.

Before Mr F. O'B. Loughnan, S.M. In the following civil cases judg: ment went by default to the plaintiff: —Kerr Bros. v. C. AHoway, £3 costs 15s; Somerville v. Munro, judgment by consent £4 7s 3d, costs 8s; Blackman and Cobb v. Young, £7 16s and costs; Jacob v. Simeon and Granville, £l6, and 12s costs; Crombie v. Taylor, £4 10s and costs 10s; Young v. Hallmond, £7 2s 2d and costs 235; same v. Dement and Mac Donald, £9 5s 5d and costs 8s; Burley v. Atkinson, £5 3s Id and coßts 24s 6d; Matthew v. Atkinson, £26 19s 6d -and costs £2 15s; Dooley and Co. v. Snowsill, £8 17s 5d and costs 23s Gd; Holloway v. McColl. £3 19s 6d and costs 10s; J. Nicholls v. Hotu, £7 0s Id and costs 27s fid.

A FOOLISH ACT,

A Maori named Riri Tawhana was charged with having damaged a bridge at Mangapehi, the property of Messrs Ellis and Burnand, Ltd. Constable Mathew conducted the case for the prosecution, and Mr Finlay appeared for the defence. The facts were that the accused demanded from Mr Gray, the company's representative at Mangapehi, money for the train running over Maori land. On being refused accused chopped one of the bridge pileß down. He thereupon told Mr Gray what he had done, otherwise a serious accident might have occurred. A heavy penalty was not asked for, but it was desirable that accused should be taught that he could not interfere with the train line. j His Worship inflicted a fine of 10s and costs 375. Damage to the amount of £5 was ordered to be paid by accused. A LOST HORSE. Robert H. Johnston, a farmer a Rangitoto, claimed from H. J. Free the sum of £ls, the value of a horse, j Mr Howarth appeared for plaintiff and Mr Sharpies instructed by Mr Finlay for the defence. Mr Howarth, in opening the case for the plaintiff said the circumstances were that a horse belonging to plaintiff had been left by plaintiff's brother at defendant's stable to be fed and Daddccked. The horse had got out of the paddock and had not been recovered. Defendant had lent plain tiff a horse on two occasions without charge. Subsequently defendant denied all responsibility. Plaintiff gave evidence in support of the claim. He assessed the value of the horse at £l2, but his brother had been offered £ls for it. C. W. Sandford Cox, whose evidence was" taken in Geraldine, also corro--1 borated the statements of the plaintiff - and his brother, with regard to the ■ admission made by the man "Snow," that the horse had been let out of the ' paddock by him. This closed the 1 case for the plaintiff. 3 H. J. Free, called by Mr Sharpies, - staged that he was absent from Te Kuiti during November and Decembei last year. On his return he was tolc a by the stable boy that the hors» ■ had been lost and made every effor r to recover it. a J. Churston stated that "Snow' had not gone up to the paddock a n all while the horse was there. A. C. Taylor ("Snow") admittei s that he had stated to plaintiff and hi brother that some one in the stabl

had let the horse out of the paddock. The statement was not true and was made by him with the object of getting rid of the plaintiff. He valued the horse at £3 10s. McLeod stated that he knew the horse and valued it at £4 10s. His Worship, m giving judgment, stated that he was not satisfied with the evidence of the employees at th« stable. The admission _ made by "Snow" was a serious one, and he

thought that there had been gross negligence. He must give a verdict for the plaintiff. He considered that the weight of evidence showed that the value of the horse was about £lO. He therefore gave judgment for £lO and costs £6 15s.

' A CASE FOR APPEAL

Jack Taylor, a half-caste, was charged with having counselled and aided in the procuring of a bottle of whisky for a Maori. Constable Mathew conducted the prosecution and Mr Sharpies appeared for the defendant. , The facts as related by tlfe police were that on the night of July 16th defendant was accosted by the police when coming out of a billiard room. He had a bottle of whisky- in his pocket, and the liquor was taken charge of by the police. Mr Sharpies did not dispute the facts, but held that possession of liquor by a Maori did not prove that the offence defendant was charged with had been committed. He submitted the prosecution: must show .the manner in which defendant had become possessed of the liquor in order to prove the offence. The onus of proving his innocence was not thrown upon the defendant. The liquor might have been stolen; it might have been found; or it might have been provided for medicinal purposes. These were assumptions, but they were assumptions which had to be negatived by the prosecution, and this had not been done. He submitted there was no case to answer.

His Worship upheld Mr Sharpies' contention and dismissed the case.

Constable Mathew gave notice of appeal. His WorshifPsaid he would be glad to have the case go to appeal and have a ruling on the point raised.