MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIV, Issue 90, 6 October 1911, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

j YESTERDAY'S SITTINGS. I At il:e Magistrate's Court vesLcrday, before Mr. A. Crooke, S.M.. there was a. fairly heavy and varied list. Some of the lines inflicted were of a salutary nature. ' I BREACHES OF BOROUGH BY-LAWS.' _ Howard IS. Russ was fined 5s and costs is for cycling without lights aiter .sunset.

Clyde Penwarden -was fined 10s and costs 7s for riding a horse on the Esplanade.

j Charlotte M. West was charged with J riding a cycle on the footpath in Wallace I Place, within the borough. Her husband j appeared', and on her behalf pleaded guilty, lie remarked, however, that his wife was of opinion that the footpath was outside the borough. In answer to the Bench, Inspector Tipping said he believed the footpath was aetuaJly outside the borough ■boundary, but it was under the Borough Council's control. The S.M. pointed out that the information charged the. defendant' with an offence within the Iwrougb, and the by-laws applied only in the .borough. The ca.se would therefore be dismissed, despite the nlca of guilty. '

William Robert West, husband of the previous' defendant, pleaded guilty to a charge of driving a vehicle at night without lights. He pleaded that the night was bright and clear, but the by-laws make no exemptions on account of'moonlight, and he was fined /is and 7s costs. KECIULATINO MOTOR TRAFFIC.

Charles Little was charged by the police and pleaded guilty of having driven a molor-car in Devon street at a speed dangerous to the public. Senior-Sergeant Dart stated that Little had come in from the direction of Waita.ra, amp drove the ear along Devon street at an excessive speed, whieil' a constable and two other reliable witnesses considered was upwards of 1.-5 miles an hour. It was about ten o'clock at night, and there might or might not, have 'ibecn much traffic in the street. But in any ease the speed was excessive in the borough. Of course, he did not suggest that the car was not under control, but its speed was such that one of the 'witnesses said it "nearly took his breath away." A friend was just stepping from the sidewalk on to the road when this witness pulled him back, just as the car went by like a flash. The defendant had pleaded guilty, and had thus saved the police the ' trouble of proving the ease by calling witnesses. But still it was not a case for a nominal penalty, but should be made a warning to other motorists who drove faster than thov should do in the streets.

The remarked that the plea of guilty was an admission that the spee<l 'was excessive, an admission that motor-car drivers very .seldom made. A fine of ,t.;i was inflicted, with costs '■>. UNSTAMPED RECEIPTS.

William Alfred Thomas pleaded guilty to a charge, laid .by the police, of having given two receipts (one for £4O and the other for .-CIS) to the Werekino Road Board without having stamped them. Mr. Hutchen appeared for the defendant, and said the offences.were committed in ipure ignorance. In his experience no one dreamed of wilfully evading payment of stamp duty on receipts, for the amount was so trilling. He hud 'been given to understand that the clerk of the road board, who ought to have been able to put Thomas right, was himself ignorant that the. receipts should have been stamped, for the board's own receipts were exempt, and the clerks of .some road boards 'were sometimes under the mistaken impression that receipts given to them were al.-o exempt from stamp duty. The defendant, lie said, was a road contractor, in a small wav.-,

Sergeant Dart said that it was quite evident that the offences were the result of carelessness, and the case was not one for the infliction of a heavy penally. His Worship remarked that in such a ra.se as this the offence was sure to be found out by the Oovernment auditor, and the sergeant said that that was how this prosecution arose. Defendant was fined ss, with costs 7=, on each charge. A 'MAINTENANCE CASE. '

John C. Smith was charged with noncompliance with an order for payment for the maintenance of his wife and family. Tlis wife appeared, and -said that her husband could get regular work at the railway goods shod at New Plvmoutli, but he would not <ro for it. The foreman in charge.of the shed had as[wired her of this, and. had said -he might mention the matter in court. TSut defendant had told her time and again that he would not keep her. The case was adjourned in order to allow the railway goods shed foreman to bo produced. i Smith said he wished to aipply for a .variation of the order, but was told by the S.M. that such an application must ] be made in writing.