S. M. COURT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLVI, Issue 2826, 20 December 1924, Page 3

S. M. COURT.

'MONTHLY SITTING. The ordinary monthly sitting of the local S.AI. Court was held yesterday, before Air J. L. Stout, S.AI. BY-LAW CASES. William White, V. J. Frecklington, and Charles Wilson, for driving motor cars at an excessive rate of speed within the borough, were each fined £2 with costs 7/-. WANDERING STOCK.

Hugh Jones, charged with allowing a horse to wander on the County roads was fined 5/- with costs 7/-. A. J. Thompson was charged with allowing stock to wander on the County roads. Air Berry (Manawatu County Council traffic inspector) . gave evidence that on the 23rd November he noticed some cows wandering on the Poplar road. He drove the animals to defendant’s gate and asked him if they belonged to him. He denied the fact so witness impounded the stock. The following morning they were claimed by defendant. This was defendant’s second offence. Fined £1 with costs £1 3/-. BREACH OF PROHIBITION ORDER, D. G. Robinson, charged with a breach of his prohibition order was fined £1 with costs 7/-. The police made application for the issue of a prohibition order against J. O’Reilly. Air Bergin appeared for O’Reilly and opposed the order. In evidence Constable Ryan said that lie knew O’Reilly well.. He was a man who gave the police a fair ampunt of trouble and frequented hotels when open and closed. On Sundays he frequented the river bank, with others, and was more or less under the influence of liquor. He was a friend of Robinson’s, a prohibited man and was with h'im at 2.30 aim. on the 12fh ult., when Robinson was arrested tor a breach of his prohibition order. O’Reilly was then under the influence of liquor. He was a single man and could not pay his way. Constable Owen gave corroborative evidence and stated that O’Reilly’s father, had approached him with a view to having a prohibition order taken out against his son, but, after talking the matter over, bad decided to give him another chance and left the matter in abeyance. John O’Reilly in evidence, said he had never lost any work through drink, nor had he been arrested for drunkenness. To Constable Owen: He did not remember Constable Ryan warning him that if he did not pull himself together a prohibition order would be taken out against him. He did not know that his father had complained to Constable Owen about him. He paid board regularly to his parents, with whom he lived. ’ O’Reilly’s mother gave evidence that her son in no way disturbed the peace at home, and was always quiet. He never lost any work through drink and paid his board regularly. Air Bergin said that O’Reilly was a single man and was quite able to maintain himself. He did not consider there was sufficient, evidence to warrant the issuing of a prohibition order against the man. The S.AI. pointed out that Counsel had that day proceeded against his client for the recovery of a sum of money owing to a local firm. If he drank less he would be able to pay his debts.

Constable Owen: He has not paid a fine imposed on him last court day yet. * Air Bergin: Nobody fine in Foxton until they have to. The S.AI. said he & ve O’Reilly another chariCw"and dismissed the application. CIVIL CASES. Judgment for plaintiff by default was entered up in the ease Barr and Tyer (Mr Bergin) v. J. O’Reilly, claim £3 19/6, costs 23/6.