LOCAL AND GENERAL.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 61, 21 November 1907, Page 2

LOCAL AND GENERAL.

The sum 01 mj was cleared us the result of the recent Fire Brigade ball, d , a ; l "'« t iiaudud over bM. Dock,,,, tu lllc

a mill l , UU '°° Tiu,,! » sUI " tlmt V T u,l,, totalling aCI" ?o "as bougm yesterday by a Jotal -em I, i-iM.ri ~i ■ .- Ull0 "» attending the Tiie lollowers of Rua, the Maori proi'u'; ",' a llttrluus slatu " l U»« FO•'•m' <•"»« («iya the Uiiakataiio Press > the 1. :. of is 11,1-, Warlord against the '[,, llakl Count v Council lor rl„. ~. :; j l,7"V°'"' -^'-.ijutd.eu.

0 U T T - Uck ' 1""* l'wprielor 0 the Ron, Sawmill, was charged, on !>'' information of .y,, Ardli( , fj '', "" -l-tor of Fish,™,, with\K t ; he wooden fence had recentW ken down. After being visited by e nspector, he had adopted the more ■ ; itnc met hud suggested by the latter. "^"l'^U. a technical breach of !'« Act bad been committed, and defendant must be convicted. Unfortunalely the Act made the minimum penalty L-. which he had perforce to impose will. ,s costs. It was, said Mr. Fitz-"■ri'i-rt. a pity that Magistrates were not allowed more discretion i„ matters "I tins sort, and he advised Mr. Roy to make application to tl„, I) partnieut lor remission of the line t„ ,3s. which lie (the Magistrate) would recommend, particularly as Mr. Hooker had stated the case very fairly.

mi. siiei.do.vs digestive I TAHULES After each meal gives the stomach period rest, because they contain all the natural digeslants us found in a healthy stomach. This is a common-sense jin-tlioil 0) treating all stomach troubles and (he results are certain. Mr F Woodward, :!«-,, Koss-strcct, Port Mel' bourne, Mdoria, in a letter (o the Sheldon Drug Company writes as follows : "The Dr. Sheldon Digestive Tahules purchased from you some time ago have given universal satisfaction among my trade. My wife has suffered from neiilu attacks of dyspepsia and indigestion, but sime taking your Tabules lias experienced great relief. She suffered so badly at times (hat she could not eat a piece of bread and Imllor as big as her three fingers; but now, after using T)r. Sheldon's Digestive Tubules, her appetite lias relumed, and she can cat as well as ever, ami her meals are n source of pleasure to her. Personally, f ahrars carry, some of your Tabules with Tim. and find they are of great benefit to inc. Have recommended them to inv neighbors, whose leslimonv fully accords willi our own. Am convinced Ihcv are a preparation of great, merit for <lv3 pepsia." Obtainable everywhere.

A batch of .breaches of. the licensing laws was dealt with at the S.M. Court yesterday morning. A native named John King was charged with procuring liquor for consumption off the premises. Police evidence was given that accused was accosted while driving in Devon street, and luul a bottle between lus knees, which he said contained yeast. On bring interrogated later he smashed (he bottle over the wheel of his trap. Accused pleaded not guilty, and Mr llutchen, who appeared for lnm, contended lhat there was no evidence that defendant obtained liquor from licensed premises. The contention was upheld, and the infonuafion dismissed. Defendant was convicted and fined fis_ and costs on each of two charges of driving without lialils a.nd with throwing glass on the street of the borough in contravention of section 10 of tile by-laws. . | Richard Tr'oßkin, 1 a. prohibited person, . was fined IDs and costs 7s on a charge

>f bciiur found on licensed premises. , Noorw "Main was eharsed with proenr- i ing liquor for a prohibited person, "Walter Smith. Defend-nt pleaded guilty, slating he was totally unaware that Smith wan prohibited.' The information was dismissed. The celebrations attendant on the opening of t'lie Waiwakailio ibridiro recently constituted the subject of a charge against a, young mail. Philip Eva, junr.. who was charged with supplying liquor io natives for consumption off licensed premises. Defendant said be had been asked by one committee to all end to the refreshments i and had poured out. drink and placed it on a table, and had seen natives help | themselves, He had not supplied them. Sergeant lladdrell stated the police were aware defendant was not connected with the trade and bad done the work voluntarily, not knowing he was committing nil offence, but it was time people learned that to supply liquor to Maoris in Taranaki off licensed premises was an offence punishable up to '£so line. Tlis Worship held a technical breach of Hie Act had been unwittingly committed, and convicted and discharged defendant.

Aii iiujiorlant point and one interesting to dairymen, was decided in the Jlawora District Court ou Holiday. John l'\ McGregor made a claim on the Pihama Dairy Conipany on the grounds ■that the company had wrongfully deducted '/ s i per II) on milk supplied by plaintill' (it shareholder) from Ist May, 1003, to 31st October, 1'.)03, ill the month »f January, 1!)07, and from Ist to 22nd .March, li)i)T, totalling .CS Ids !><! Also I hat the defendant company refused to take milk from the plaintill' except at a price >/ L ,d a lb less than that paid to oTlicr shareholders and suppliers, in consequence of which the plaintiff had to incur loss and expense amounting to C.I") iis. A sum of C2O was claimed for tlie infringement of plaintiff's rights us a shareholder. The total claim was .COS 15s (Id. Mr. Quilliain, for defendant conipany, moved fur a nonsuit on the grounds that the plaintiff had not shown that the company were bound to take milk from him. The. company had a right to refuse plaintiff's milk or that of any shareholder.. If the plaintiff had si right to compel the company to take 1 his milk the company could claim against him for having supplied to another company. Article 12 was quite clear, and showed that the company had 1 n right to refuse milk. He contended 1 that the principle of co-operation was equality of burden and of benefit. The 1 company wore not bound to take plain- ■ lilt's milk any more than the plaintiff ■ was bound to supply. The money which i had been paid to McGregor was' in full ' settlement for milk supplied. Article 12 ; gave the directors power to purchase or [ refuse milk or materials from any par- ■ ticnlar shareholder or shareholders. Mr. , t'aplen, for plaintiff, submitted that . when defendant signed the receipt ac- [ ecpting YA «■ H» less than other sliarcI holders lie had to take it as the only I course open to him. He contended that 5 the company had no right to differen- , tiatc in regard to payments for milk ( It was a company specially formed for the purpose of manufacturing the goods ' r of the shareholders. The purpose for which the conipany was formed was to ' take all the milk the shareholders could | supply. The company was not justified ' in paying a different price to the plainf till' than to other shareholders. He held ■ that Article 12 did not give the company ' the right. District Judge Haseldcn, in i giving his decision, said that in no part of his case hud plaintiff, in his opinion, made out any claim, and gave judgment I for the company, with costs.