THE BOROUGH BY-LAWS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XL, Issue 1915, 14 December 1918, Page 3

THE BOROUGH BY-LAWS.

ALLEGED .BREACH,

CASE DISMISSED

At yesterday’s sitting of the Magistrate’s Court the Inspector of Nuisances (James McKnight) proceeded against Charles Beast on for committing a breach of the Borough by-laws on November Kith, by wil.fully throwing slops on Lo Cook Street. Defendant pleaded not guilty. James McKnight slated that on (he morning of November Kith he noticed that night slops, including orange skins, etc., had been thrown on to the road in Cook Street. Pie spoke to defendant about it, who told him to go and clean it up. Later on in the day defendant’s wife saw witness, and a few words passed between them, and Mrs Beaston finished up by calling him “a dirty rotter.” Witness said he did not see tip; slops thrown on to the road, but he was certain they came from Mr Beaston’s house. On previous occasions he had seen Mrs Beaston throw water with which she had scrubbed the house on to the road. He had inspected their back yard and found nothing to complain about, it being very clean. Witness said be would not have brought the present case to Court had he not been abused. He brought the action to slop abuse in the execution of his duly. Charles Firth Beaston stated that on the 10th of November ho met the Inspector, who said to him: “Tell your missus not to throw slops on to the road.” He told witness Unit this was a warning, and that he would be prosecuted if he did it ngaiu. Witness refilled: “You had better deliver the message yourself.” When witness went home he told his wife. She staled that all she had thrown on the road was the water used for scrubbing (lie house, but would not (brow any more (here, and bad not done so. Witness was of opinion that in any case it was far healthier to deal with the water in the manner adopted than to put it in anything in the back yard. In connection with the inspector’s statement that orange peel had been thrown out, witness said that as everyone knew there hud been no ■oranges, with the exception of a small supply for the sick, in Buxton for some time, and as far as his house was concerned there had not been an orange there for three months.

Mr MeKnight: Did you not suy to me when I complained about the slops: “Scotty, you cun go and clean it up yourself.”

Witness: Ridiculous! I never made that statement. Mrs Boas ton staled that on the day mentioned, after scrubbing out the house, she threw the water, wh ieh contained disinfectant, on to the road. She did not know at the time !die was doing wrong, and had not thrown any more there since. She had never thrown anything except water of this kind on the road. To Mr McKnight: I certainly did not call von a dirtv rotter.

Mr MeKnight: Yon did! Witness; Well! I don’t think yon are worth arguing the point with. The Magistrate said the evidence was not sufficient to justify a conviction. There was no evidence that slops had been thrown on the road. The Inspector saw something which he took to he slops, but the other two witnesses denied that slops had been thrown out. The case would be dismissed.