WEEK-END TICKETS.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXII, Issue 27, 28 December 1916, Page 8

WEEK-END TICKETS.

NOT FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES. AN IMPORTANT DECISION. A ease of great interest to railway travellers and persons using week-end tickets was heard at the .Magistrate's Court before Justices of the Peace at Auckland last week. The case was one in which an Auckland clerk, named K. Monro Storey, was charged alternatively that on August 11 last he did travel on the railway without having previously paid the proper fare, contrary to the by-la-vs of the New Zealand Government Railways, under the Government Railways Act, 1908; and that being a person holding a ticket issued for travelling for certain specific purposes, he used the ticket for another purpose contrary to the by-laws quoted. Mr S. Mays appeared for the Department, and Mr A. Denniston for the defendant, who formally pleaded guilty. Mr Mays pointed out that the chiei object of the prosecution to make it perfectly clear to the public that those travelling on week-end tickets could not break their journeys en route to the station to which they had taken the ticket, or on their return. Despite the fact that this limitation on week-end tickets had been extensively advertised both in the newspapers and on railway stations, there were numerous cases ol persons endeavouring to avoid the conditions. In the present case defendant had taken a week-end ticket from Auckland to Tuakau and return, but on August 12, between Tuakau and Pukekohe he was warned by the guard that if he got off at Pukekohe he would have to pay the ordinary fare from Pukekohe to Auckland. Defendant said he would risk it, and test the matter. On August 11 he endeavoured to travel from Pukekohe to Auckland on a week-end ticket, and upon being called upon by the guard and ticket inspector to pay the ordinary fare, declined to do so, and complained that the conditions were unreasonable and that he wanted to fight the matter out. It was stated further by Mr Mays that the Railway Department's reason for forbidding the breaking of the journey was the perfectly good one that these tickets enabled dwellers in town and country to "make a week-end journey at minimum cost, but the tickets were not intended for commercial purposes. The commerical interests were profitmaking concerns, and could well afford to pay the ordinary rates. If breaking the journey was permitted there was grave likelihood that weekend tickets would be extensively used for commercial purposes. The object of the prosecution was not punishment, but for the information of the travelling public. Mr Denniston urged that defendant was a young man in a position where a conviction might be likely to do him harm, and that he was only fighting for what he thought was a principle of justice, the information migbt be dismissed as trivial under the Justices of the Peace Act, \fter hearing the evidence of the guard of the train who had warned the defendant the Bench ruled that they could not do otherwise than record a conviction. Defendant was 'convicted on one charge and ordered to pay costs. The alternative charge was withdrawn.