COURT NEWS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 83, Issue 46, 24 February 1939, Page 10

COURT NEWS

CIVIL CASES AT MARTON MARTON, Feb. 23. In the Marton Magistrate’s Court on Wednesday afternoon, before Mr. R. M. Watson, S.M., judgment bydefault was given in the following undefended cases: — C. A. Rofe v. G. Over, £1 4s lOd, costs 22s 8d; C. T. Lound v. R. F. Baker, £l3, costs £2 14s. Arthur Foster was ordered to , T. E. Barton the sum of £l5 15s lid, costs £1 Is, in default 14 days in Wanganui prison, warrant to be suspended so long as debtor pays 30s a month from amount owing, first payment to be made on March 1. C. Rae was ordered to pay Lows, Ltd., the sum of £3 19s 6d forthwith, in default five days’ imprisonment in Wanganui prison, warrant to be suspended so long as debtor pays 15s per month, first payment by March 1. The same was ordered to pay L. S. Death the sum of £9 Ils, costs 15s 6d. forthwith, in default 10 days’ imprisonment in Wanganui prison, warrant to be suspended so long as debtor pays 30s a month off amount owing. FAILURE TO ( LEAR NOXIOUS WEEDS Prosecutions for failure to clear noxious weeds were brought, before Mr. R . M. Watson, S.M., by the county noxious weeds inspector, Mr. A. W. Trotter, with him Mr. M. C. Fenwicke as counsel.

For failing to clear ragwort within the specified time, Papa Te Hina, who pleaded not guilty, was convicted and fined £2, costs 32s 6d, four weeks being allowed in which to pay. Koeroa Marumaru, for failure to clear hemlock after having received notice to do so, was convicted and lined £2, costs 31s 6d. Marumaru pleaded not guilty. The inspector stated that approximately half of the infested area had been sprayed and a good job made of it, but unfortunately in the meantime the remainder had seeded. The case was regarded as serious as the hemlock was along a boundary fence and likely to spread on to clean adjoining properties. In evidence Marumaru said he was the lessee of the property. He had no intention to evade his responsibility in the matter of clearing his land. The half not attended to was not actually his property, the boundary fence having been moved to iU present position by agreement for his neighbour’s convenience. In other words the actual boundary was not fenced.

Mr. Watson: This area is of some three acres? —Yes. And your stock have acces to it?— Yes, but it is mostly sandhill and of little use.

“That,” said Mr. Watson, “is beside the point. You are in effect the occupier, and the Act says you are responsible for keeping the land clear.

“A conviction must be entered. It is unfortunate that in the meantime the hemlock has seeded.”

Piupiu Uru, who pleaded guilty to failure to clear hemlock after having received notice, was convicted and fined 10s, costs 32s 6d. It was stateu in this case that Uru had cleared Lie hemlock but not within the specified time, and consequently some had seeded. A good job had been made.