MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, 20 May 1921, Page 7

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

JfEW PLYMOUTH SITTING. CASE UNDER ARMS ACT. A sitting of the New Plymouth Magistrate’s Court was held yesterday, before Mr. C. R. Orr Walker, S.M. Edward Francis Meyer was charged, “that, being a person other than a licensed dealer, he did by way of purchase procure possession of an automatic pistol without being in possession of a permit issued by the police under the Arms Act, 1920.” This was contrary to -section 7 (1) of the Arms Act, 1920. Olaf Edmund Perrson was conjointly charged with delivering possession of the firearm to Meyer. Mr. R. H. Quilliam appeared for the defence, and outlined the facts of the case. Persson was a returned soldier, and had got possession of the weapon, a German automatic pistol, as a souvenir whilst on service. In February he sold the weapon to Meyer. He acted in ignorance of the Arms Act, but when Meyer found out about the regulations he took the weapon to the police and frankly admitted the circumstances. Neither had an idea that it was an offence to buy or sell such a weapon. He thought, considering the circumstances, it was unfair to drag the defendants to court, and he submitted that the prosecution should not have been brought. It was the first case of the kind in New Plymouth, and was really only a technical offence.

The Magistrate presumed the police had brought the case in order to show that the offence was a serious one. The case was more or less a technical default, and the pistol would be confiscated. The defendants would be convicted and discharged. WATER IN MILK. Edward Haskell, a New Plvmouth milk vendor, was charged with selling to A. E. Kendall, health inspector, a sample of milk containing 7| per cent, of added water. Defendant pleaded guilty. He said he bought some of his milk from Mr. Ward, of Frankley Road. Ward used a milking machine with a releaser, and a certain amount of water was put in after milking to take out any milk that was left in the releaser. Some mistake had evidently occurred by which defendant had taken his milk from the factory can (which contained some of the water from the releaser) instead of from his own.

J. W. Ward, farmer, Frankley Road, corqborated defendant’s statement that some mistake had evidently been made, but he could not absolutely vouch for the facts.

Defendant said he had conducted a milk run for twelve years and this was the first complaint. The Magistrate said he looked upon the offence as serious, but he accepted defendant’s explanation that the offence hhd not-been done wilfully. Apparently a mistake had been made, but it was one that Haskell was answerable for. The same excuse would not be accepted again. Defendant was convicted and fined £2, costs 17s 6d. POLICE CASES. Joseph Rielly, brought up on remand, pleaded guilty to being an idle and disorderly person without lawful means of support. The Magistrate ordered that he should be sent back to his brother’s farm, and, in convicting and discharging Reilly, advised him to keep away from the town.

A further remand to Waitara on May 23 was made in the case of Thomas Joseph Spalding, charged with the theft at Waitara on April 6 of a brief bag, a Bengal razor and strop, a pocket knife, a shaving brushy and a pair of scissors, of a total value of £3 3s 6d, the property of Geo. T. B. Kenab, farmer, of Okoke. BREACHES OF COUNTY BY-LAWS. On the information of the inspector of the Taranaki County (Mr. B. Tippins), the following cases were dealt with:— Alexander Wright, for allowing 22 cows to wander on the Wortley Road on April 27, was fined £2 and costs 17s Gd. Isaac Newton, for allowing a horse to wander on the New Plymouth-Waitara Road on May 2, was fined 10s, costs 17s 6d. Frank Coppstake, for allowing 18 cows and 2 calves'to wander on the Manutahi Road, was fined 30s and costs 17s 6d. Hugh Purdie, for allowing two bull calves to wander on the Waitara Road, was fined 10s and costs 7s. Geo. Waller, for allowing Jive calves to wander on the Baker Road, was fined 10s, costs 17s 6d. Herbert Julian, allowing a horse to wander in Dixon Street, Oakura, was fined £l, costs 17s 6d. For failing to pay the balance of a maintenance order (£2 15s), Thomas Joseph Spalding was sentenced to 14 days’ hard labor, the sentence to be suspended if Spalding paid the balance of £2 15s forthwith. ON LICENSED PREMISES.

Ambrose and Albert Loveridge were charged with being on licensed premises (the Breakwater Hotel) at 8.30 p.m on May 12, at a time when the premises were required to be closed. Senior-Sergeant McCrorie deposed that, in company with Constable Small, he visited the Breakwater Hotel at 8.30 p.m. on May 12. They saw the two Loveridges, the barman and a boarder playing billiards. Ambrose Loveridge said that he had been boarding at the hotel for the last three nights. Albert Loveridge said that he lived in a beach cottage. At present, he said, his family wad away from home, but, on investigating, the police had found that this was not so. Cross-examined, witness said that the men’s names were on the hotel bedroom book for the night in question, but not for any nights immediately previous. I Constable Small gave corroborative evidence. . Mr. C. H. Croker, Who appeared for the defendants, said that;, the men were genuine boarders. Ambrose had stayed at the hotel before and, subsequently Albert’s wife was awajf at the time, and his sister in-law was: called in meanwhile to look after the children, so Loveridge had stayed, at the hotel. Ambrose stayed at the’ hotel Ihiefly because he often went out fishing early in the morning, and the hotel very handy for the purpose. Edward D HammoncJ, licensee of the Breakwater Hotel, gav<; evidence. The hotel bedroom book waq produced, showing that the Loveridges, had stayed at the hotel on nights othet than May 12. Senior-Sergeant McCrdrie admitted that their names appeared against bedroom No. 14 on the I2thl, but on the sights preceding No. 14 -wae blank in

the book. Now names appeared against it. It was explained by Hammond that Mrs. Hammond kept the book and filled it in every night. ' The Magistrate decided that Mr« Hammond should be called to give evidence, as she appeared to know inost about the book. The case was accordingly adjourned to May 23 to allow Mrs. Hammond to give evidence. BILLIARDS IN AN HOTEL. The licensee of the Breakwater Hotel, Edward D. Hammond, was then charged with allowing a game of billiards to be played on the premises at 8.30 pm. on. May 12, which wae a time when they were required to be closed. Mr. C. H. Croker, who appeared for defendant, said the facts were admitted, but he contended, that a conviction should not be entered. The billiard room was a private one, and it was a common thing for Hammond and his friends, and possibly some of the guests, to take part in a game at nights, especially during the winter time. The law, counsel said, was framed with the object of preventing people congregating in hotel billiard rooms and being supplied with liquor. There was no suggestion of such an offence in this case, however. His Worship said he could not understand why Hammond, with a lengthy experience as licensee, did not know he was committing an offence. The law was quite definite, and the practice would have to be stopped. He would take a lenient view of the matter in thig instance, but the case should be a warning to publicans. Hammond would be convicted and fined £2, with costs 7s.