S.M. COURT.

Otaki Mail, 4 May 1923, Page 3

S.M. COURT.

OTAKI—THURSDAY. (Before J. Logan Stout, Esq., S.M.) Breach of Order. Police v. Geo. Carver—Charge of being on licensed premises during currency of prohibition order.—Defendant pleaded guilty. Constable Satherley said he found defendant at the bar with boor hi his hand. The defendant, on being questioned, mid be thought the order .'.a I expired.—Fined £2 and costs 12s. On Licensed Promises. Police v. Palm King—Charge of being on licensed premises during closing hours. Defendant pleaded gui'ty. j Honaro. Haru Raika, and .twikiwi I Meta «ere similarly charged. Henare plunctd gvilty, the others not guilty. Constable !?&therley said he f >a el tie defendants in the Family Hotel, with a j boarder, Moa Kipa. The bar door was j open and empty glasses were on the counter. The licensee, when questioned, said the b s—meaning the men—■would not go out. He heard others had "bolted."

Haru Raika stated at about a quarter to live August Bishop told him a haka crowd was required at the kiosk and being manager he decided to go. He was told to get men and went into the hotel to get his mates. Just as he entered the constable followed. To the Sergeant: I had had about half a dozen drinks during the day; I had no drink after tea. I'm fond of liquor and a prohibition order was issued, against me on one occasion. The hot'el was not usually a meeting-place but he saw his mates go in. and followed to bring them out.

King stated that he went in to get the licensee to go to the kiosk. When he entered the hotel he heard a noise and called Mr Walters. He pushed the bar door and walked in, then the constable came. He had had no drink. Walters told him to leave. The S.M. said the excuse was not suf-

ficient; there was no excuse to enter the hotel. Each would be fbied £2 and costs 7s, and 5s translation.

The constable applied for a prohibition order against Raika. Ho was, he said, a married man and had four children, and drank freely. The last order expired only a short time ago. viz., December 21st. His general conduct had not been too good.

Raika opposed the order, stating he had well catered for his wife.—Order renewed. -

A cnarge was also preferred against the ex-licensee of the hotel, of exposing liquor for sale, contrary to Statute. This case arose out of the preceding one.

Mr Duukley appeared for defendant! and pleaded not guilty. It was stated that the constable found the hotel bar door open, liquor ■exposed, and live Natives present. All were leaning against the bar, and a man behind the bar who, the licensee stated, was assisting. The licensee, asked the reason for the Maoris being there, said he could not get tin' b —— s out. He ordered the Natives out in the presence of the constable and all left, j Two of the Natives gave no explana- i tion fur their presence there. The licensee afterwards said he was sorry. Inn hcins his last night at the kotel he had had more drinks than ho should have had. The Natives may have been there some time for all he knew. To Mr Dunklcy: Raika told mo there was a haka at the kiosk. I saw medium glasses on the bar counter. The slides in the passage wore closed down, and the door, when locked, stopped one from entering from outside. Sir Dunkley stated it was the licensee's last night on the premises, his wife was away, and that Johnston and Walters went in the bar to clean it out. The door-lock failed to catch after they entered. "While cleaning the bar the Natives came in and called out "Are you there, Charlie?"

" At this stage the S.M. suggested that evidence be given—he had no wish to hear it twice.

The licensee stated: I remember the night of the affair; it was ni.v last night at the hotel. In t.hg piteraoon I was busy and asked Johnston to help. At 6 we closed the bar and later I said we will .go and clean up as the new licensee is expected. We went in. and before uoniiug out we had a pony shandy each. Just as I was coming out a Native called "Are you there, Charlie?" and walked in. The lock of the door had not caught and he walked in. He asked me if I would go to the kiosk, and I said I was busy, and to go outside and wait. No drinks were asked for. Just then Constable Satherley walked in. All slides were down and locked. To the Sergeant: It was Tvi- _ .10' called out ao me; it was a l.tie after 7 o'eloet" There were other Natives jjetafc outside the door when the eonstable came in. I thought the door was locked against intruders.

John Johnston stated he remember- c ;ed the occasion; he had been helping.! j After tea he entered the bar to clean up, and had just finished cleaning up and had a drink when some Natives entered. He thought the door was ! locked but evidently the catch had .

failed to hold. There was no drink' served to the Natives. ■ i Mr Dunkley considered there wa? ao .wilful breach, and no evidence of the sale of liquor. He thought a conviction should not be entered, but if a penalty was to be inflicted In- hoped it ' would be light. Fined £5 and costs 7s. Police v. H. Knocks—Charge of being on licensed premises after closing hours. —No appearance of defendant, who pleaded guilty by letter. Constable Satherley said he heard Knpeks ask for drink, and the licensee refuse him and order him to leave. Fined £2 and costs 7s. Unregistered Anns. Police v. Mold Eipa—Charge of being in possession of an uaregistfirfid

shot-gun, also with being in possession of an unregistered riflo. Defendant pleaded guilty to both charges. Constable Satherley said Kipa had had the guns in his possession for six years, but really did not own them. Kipa had brought the guns to him, and he was advised to prosecute. Accused bore a good character, there being nothaig against him for some time. Fined 10s and costs 12s in each case. Cruelty. Police v. Robert Close—Charge of illtreating horses at. places between Pal-, merstou North and Otaihaiiga N'o ap- j Ipearanec of defendant. Constable | , Satherley stated Close admitted the of- j ' fence. Some time ago complaints I ivero made about; accused ill-treating! , horses, he being contractor for laying • j the Mangahao electric poles. The j , horses were in a shocking state, and one man refused to work them. De- | fondant admitted he had no right to j work the animals.—Fined £5 and costs | Ms 6d. ! Breach of By-Laws. Police v. Richard William Gower— Charge of riding a bicycle at night without lights. Defendant pleaded guilty. Constable Satherley said the charge was laid under the new Otaki Borough Council's by-laws.—Fined ss, costs 7s. Police v. R. Syunott—Similar charge —Fined 5s and 7s costs. Police v, Stanley Moffatt —Similar charge. Fined ss, costs 7s. Unstamped Meat,

T. C. Webb (Inspector of stock) v. Belton Deukin—Charge that he did allow certain carcases to be removed from his slaughter-house before the necessary brand was affixed. —No appearance of defendant.

Sir Webb stated that Deakin, although previously warned, hud been found with a cart load of meat, none of which had been branded. The meat was in good condition, but a guarantee was necessary that it had been killed at a registered slaughter-house. A fine of £2, and costs 14s «d, was inflicted, the S.M. remarkng that he hoped it would act as a warning. Civil Cases. G. H. Harper (Mr Atmore) v. W. F. Curie—Claim £l2 lis.—Judgment by default, with costs. Peter Vella (Mr Harper) v. Abraham and Williams (Mr Park)—Claim £4l 5s for alleged breach of warranty of authority. It was stated that Vella purchased sheep for the express purpose of producing lambs.

William Baker said he was the owner of the 111 ewes referred to and sold at Te Horo. His instructions to Abraham and Williams were that they were running with Romney rams. Evidence was given by Cyril Day. auctioneer, that the conditions of sale were posted up in the Te Horo yards when the sale was made. He remembered this particular sale, said it was the custom to refer to the conditions of the sale.

To Mr Harper: The sale was in July, but I cannot say who started it. There were .sheep and cattle in the yards. It is always usual to refer to the conditions of sale: the conditions were posted up. I remember selling the line of ewes, I think they were the last line of sheep sold. I do not remember saying they were in lamb. I would not contradict a statement if made that I said the ewes were in lamb; I may have said they were in lamb to a Romney

Peter Vellu stated: I have been farming in Otaki for about 20 years. I purchased a line of 111 ewes in July last at Te Horo. Mr Day being the auctioneer. I was present at the beginning of the sale and saw the first line dispos'ed of. I heard the conditions of the sale referred to . The S.M. said all were aware of the conditions of stock sales, which were posted up in each yard. Under these circumstances he could not take evidence; he did not think it necessary for auctioneers to read the conditions. The reference should be sufficient.

Mr Harper: There should be more than a prefunctory reference to the conditions. The S.M.: I do not think =0! A non-suit was granted. Five witnesses were granted 10s each as expen-