MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, 1 October 1920, Page 8

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

YESTERDAY'S SITTING, The usual sitting of the Magistrate's Court, New Plymouth, was held yesterday, Mr. T. A. B. Bailey, S.M., presiding. I BREACHES OF PROHIBITION ORDER J. G. H. Blane was charged with committing breaches of his prohibition, order on September 11th and Ixsth, and also came up for sentence on a third charge, on which he had appeared before the Court on 20th September. Sub-Inspec-tor Hutton put in a list of previous offences recorded against Blane, the majority being breaches of the prohibition order. His Worship said he had some difficulty in deciding how to deal with accused. On being asked why he could not keep off liquor, Blane replied that he had af ways been used to a glass of beer. The Bench decided to give accused a further chance. His Worship said he did not like to send a good worker as Blane was to Rotoroa. It was different in the case of many persons who were continually drinking and did not work. , Blane was fined £2 on each of the charges of procuring liquor, and on the tfhird information was convicted and ordered to come up for sentence if called upon. A BREACH OF THE STOCK ACT. A charge of committing a breach of the Stock Act by/defacing the ears of sheepskins was preferred against George Payne, of Okau. Sir. Quilliam, for the defence, said the case was an adjourned one, the police having finished their ease when the hearing was adjourned on account of the fact of Payne having been committed for trial on the indictable offence of the theft of the sheep off which the skins had been taken. He was acquitted by the Supreme Court, the evidence as to mutilation being evidently accepted by the jury. It was to the effect that he had purchased these sheep from various dealers at public auctions. Owing to having passed through the hands of different owners there were a good number of marks' on some of the ears, and when Payne went to put his own mark on then he sometimes only succeeded in adding to the mutilation. After the hearing of evidence, Payne was convicted and fined £3. His Worship said it would be well if farmers took note of the fact that it was also an offence to leave the ears off the skins, as had been done in two instances in the present case. THREATENING BEHAVIOR. An information concerning the use of threatening and abusive language was brought against Frank Peat. The incident arose out of the fact that defendant was refused admission to a theatre, as the house was full. Garnet H. Saunders said that on 4th September a travelling company was showing at the Empire Theatre. There was a big crowd, and eventually the sale of tickets was stopped. Peat and a couple of companions arrived, seeking admission, and were told that no mora patrons could be allowed in, and were asked to leave. Witness went away to another part of the house, and was later informed that-'the three men had gone upstairs. He proceeded there, and found them enaaged in an argument with the doorkeeper. They were again j asked to leave. Several times Peat I threatened to punch witness' jaw, ar/ ; was abusive, though his language wa> not obscene. This continued for sonil time, but he eventually left. On the following Monday Peat came and tendered a very full apology for every< thing that had happened. Mr. A. A. Bennett, for the defendant, sahl that Peat's explanation was that he was under the influence of liquor, and could nirt remember what had occurred A fine of 10s, with costs 9s, was imposed. ALLEGED ILLEGAL IMPOUNDING. Momona Tamiliana (Mr. R. 11. Quilliam) proceeded against Kaitapapa Rangitawa (Mr. H. Billing), alleging that he illegally impounded, on August 24, twenty-four cattle belonging to complainant, and had demanded excessive damages for trespass, wherefor the plaintiff claimed £lO compensation and £4 las, the amount paid to the poundkeeper at Rahotu to release the cattle. Mr. Quilliam said that complainant occupied part of the Maori block at Rahotu, and defendant was a nearby neighbor. Tre, Natives occupied practi-. cally all of the block, and most of the fences were in a bad condition. On August 24 Momona learned that some of his cattle had been impounded by Kaitapapa Rangitawa. On locating the pound-keeper he was asked to pay the sunt of £4 ss, including £2 special claim by Rangitawa, before the cattle' were released. This was paid under protest. The land on which the cattle trespassed, it was claimed, was not protected by a sufficient fence within the meaning of the Act, and therefore j Rangitawa was not entitled to damages for trespass or special claim. Counsel said that no damages had been done to the property on to which the cattle str.ayed. Evidence was given by Peter Berge (pound-keeper), the plaintiff and his brother, Whitiwai Tamihana. Mr. Billing contended that there was no evidence to show that the protest had been lodged prior to the release of the cattle. There was also the question an to whether, it was a'proper notice within the meaning of the Act. At his Worship's request Berge was rc-called on the queston of the time the protest' was received. He said it was not made until the following morning, but Andrews (the man who wrote it out; said that as the cattle were impounded on the 24th, the previous day, he had better make the protest the same date Decision was deferred. SHARING A HOUSE. "This is trouble arising from the ci'rrent day practice of sharing houses," said Mr. A. A. Bennett, counsel for complainant, in introducng a case in which Mary O'Grady proceeded against Charles Gallagher for using insulting language, and asking that he be bound over to keep the peace. Mr. P. B. Fitsherhert appeared for defendant. Mr. Bennett said that Gallagher had called complainant's husband and son blncklcgs, and had callel her a mongrel and waster and threatened to strike her. Mrs. O'Grady's son, Mike, told Gallagher not to talk like that about his mother, and said he would have to prove his words. Ultimately complainant went to the police; by the.time a constable arrived Gallagher had returned to lys part of the house. Evidence was given by complainant, her son (Michael O'Gady), and her husbnnd (James O'Grady). for the dsfenqe ; Mr. Fiteherbert re-

marked that part of fhe evidence showed there was some dispute about a sum of money Gallagher had lost, and the argument became , rather heated, Gallagher was not likely to strike a woman of Mrs. O'Grady's age, and the words complained Of were not used to her, but to her son. Charles Gallagher, and his wife, Stella Gallagher, also gave evidence. 'His Worship said he would adjourn the case for three months. He did not think theje would be any more trouble among the parties, and there was nothing of sufficient seriousness to bind over Gallagher to keep the peace, though he seemed to have lost control of himself on this occasion. COUNTY BY-LAWS. Convictions were recorded against the following for allowing 9tock at large on county roads: —T. Hook, fine 10a, costs 17s fld; E. .J. Balder, fine £2, costs 17s 6d.