S.M. COURT.

Otaki Mail, Volume XXVIII, 8 October 1920, Page 4

S.M. COURT.

i f OTAKI —THURSDAY. (Before J. L. Stout. Hsq.. S.M.) Wandering Stock. Goo. Watson v. Paul Jenkins.Charge of allowing stork to wander a Waikanao. Defendant pleaded guilt/ staling his lior.se had got out ot thpa (.(clock. Tilled lOs and costs 12s. Geo. Watson v, Allan Smith. si mi la charge.—-No appearance oL' defendan Tiie ranger pointed uni that defend aid had no paddock, was a continuon onomler. hut had not previously he,* belore the Court. .Pined M's, mists I: (Jeo. Watson v. Mrs Power, Minin, charge. Defendant [Headed guill. The ranger said this was delcndant • third offence. Pined fas. costs 7s. Geo. Watson w Edward- Webby, similar charge. No uppearanee of d« iendunt. The ranger stated tins Webby wtis tin old offender, and thn hi:; stuck wus cottlimtoiisly on Go. ro.vi. This was it is third offence with in few months. Pitied 15-, costs ;s On Licensed Premises. •Police v. Aed King, clung'' of hen-... Oil licensed premises ..at Otaki dni .u (uirei• c • ui pjuinhiiiun order. ■IT i endani pleaded guilty.' it v. as state i-l'.ug hud a previous conviction. Pinet. COstS 12s. Reckless Driving. W. Larsen; who was charged with M.-ekl* s. v ly driving a motor hike, pleaded guilty, stating lie was unaware tn v. as travelling at an excessive speed Pined £2, costs 12s. A Milk Case. A. -J. Barnes was charged with seil i;r; tuiik coni (lining water. Mr. Uaipu, appealed !i-r dni'cnduiil. ami p.ea'.o-. in .lading .Mi i»a in e v. as -urn; hie U nH'uai at J Ik- Guml. 2d r I'Lupiu si.:lm. ;ii {Alejiualn-n that Ai r Barm wa.* ii wlieu lire .•«(r*• de was taken and ui lo ill tend pei .-oimiiy ki inilkn.u and Lad to rely on his man. f .i lie j 11 i 11’ was' isi-.ru to the fatlojy, a san.ph inker.. imi Lames did not have r. anaiy;-.i d. .Games was a careful fai men. m a good position, and nor a man cull lor pecuniary gnu by adding water. lie did not know what hao happened, hut lit ere was no eriminn intention. The milk was rich in faG. while solids were unite satisfactoiy. Under the eiieumstanco. Air Harper asked that a lenient, view he taken el the matter. The S.M. said there was (> per cent of added water, and lined defendant £3 and costs. W in. .1. Al iller, charged with selling adulterated milk. [Leaded not guilty. Frederick W. Kawiing.-on. oliie *• under Sale of Pood and Drags Act. staled: On the 2"rd October J obtain ed a sample of Miller’s milk at the Ranni fa'dory. It wa- divided into throe parts as usual, and found to e<m tain h per cent of added water. To Mr At iller: The fat was 2.7 am! the solids 5.2. while was ilie staa da id. This was not due to hoifsncoming on. hut simply to added wal*' I o feiidanl stated: My sons run : farm, hut 1 am the owner. They stai« j there was no added water, and 1 • • | ! end the water is the result of heifer;I eoming in. My sons have a cooler, ae ' perhaps a few drippings may haw fallen into the milk. X.. sane man would jeopardise his position for tw • 1 pints of water. Nothing had be«o. j done for ]»rolif. Pined £2 and costs 2ds 2d. j Breach of Prohibition Order. ( Claude Watson was charged with ; procuring liquor'While prohibited. M> • Ktnvelex appeared for defendant, and ple:oled guilty. lie stated that d • I'eudant went to the .races recently, where lie thought he was entitled Jo have a drink, and was Mirprised to Hear lie had committed an oiiVnce. J: he had known it was against the lav. he would not have had liquor. Fined lUs and costs 7s. Unregistered Dog. Piank L'ootes. charged by the Town Boaid regisiiar pico. Gallagher) • wit•» keeping an unregistered dog. was con- | v;cted and lined lo> and costs 12s. I Undefended Cases. j In the following eases judgment was given for plain till* bv default:--Otaki Town Duaid v. Roach, claim £22 2s ind, costs £2 (is (id; Bills and Aloorc v. C. J. Smith, claim £lO As 10d, costs oos Oil; Askew Bros, v, C. J. .Slii el, claim £4 17s ad. costs 2Ss (id: J. \Y. Shelley v. I'utu CliiiTic, clam £l2 I'M. costs 30>. Judgment Summons. Alex. Bioin (Air A:more) v. Claude Pike, claim £2l -Is. Defendant stated he was not in constant employment, and was only earning about £3 per week. He was a married man with sixin his family. A'o order. • k T. P. Dunne (Air At more) v. Daniel F. Cole, claim £2d 12s nd. Defendant stated he lived in Levin and worked there with Lee and Atkins at 14s per day. He was married and had seven children, lie had no laud, no assets, he owned no fishing plant, or boat. No order, the KAIL pointing out that storekeepers were foolish to give such men credit. -T. Howard Andrew v. Charles Adam?, claim £lO 13s 7d. Order made for payment. £•"* to be paid by end of October and balance at end of November.