MAGISTERIAL.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2224, 23 June 1908, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

MONDAY, JUNE 22nd a (Before Mr W. A. Barton, tS.M.) DRUNKENNESS. A female first offender for drunkenness was convicted and fined 186 with 2s costs, the amount of her bail. Robert Berwick, for a third offence within a period of six months, was fined £3 anil 2s costs in default seven clays' imprisonment. A prohibition order was aka issued against him. John White alias O'Keefe, who also was changed-with liis third offence in the same period was dealt with in- a similar manner. DISOR D Ell L Y BEHAVIOUR. A Scandinavian named Oscar Neilson pleaded guilty to a charge of disorderly behavior while drunk in Gladstone Road nil Saturday night last. Police evidence showed that- the .accused hail been interrupting the proceedings of the Salvation Army, anil when advised to desist, refused to do so. A penalty of £1 with 2s costs or I days’ imprisonment; was imposed. PROCURING LIQUOR.

Angus Skinner, a plasterer; by trade admitted having procured liquor during the currency of a prohibition order against him. He was convicted and fined £5 with 9s costs or an alternative 30 days’ hard labor. Fourteen- days were allowed in which to nay the fine. * BREACHES OF COUNTY BYE-LAWS.

John M. Robertson and James Biddie, were proceeded against bv the County Clerk (Mr Stock) for having driven two-wliecled drays drawn by four horses on tile Wainui road, such drays having tyres of less than live inches in width. In the case of the first defendant, ignorance of the byelaws was pleaded and also that he was working for wages. It was stated on behalf of the other defendant that lie was not sure of the boundaries. His Worship said that it seemed absurd to him that persons-could plead ignorance of cither the bye-laws or the boundaries. They had been well published. A fine of £1 with 7s costs was imposed in. each case. A MAINTENANCE CASE. Thomas Kerr (Mr Mann) was proceeded against by Edith Carden (Mistook) for failing to comply with the terms of an order requiring him to pay 7s 6d weekly towards the support of his illegitimate child. Defendant elected to be dealt with summarily and pleaded guilty. Air Stock mentioned that the arrears had amounted to £7 17s (xl, but a sum of £4 10s had been paid after the last proceedings had been taken. Air Maim for tho defendant stated that this amount had been sent to Mr Stock by defendant and should have reached him before it apparently had. His client was now prepared to pay up the remaining arrears and he (counsel) would suggest to His Worship that he should, instead of imposing a penalty, accept sureties that tho terms of the order would be complied with in future. His Worship pointed out that defendant, by his non-compliance with the order and by his apparent treatment of the summons with contempt, had placed himself in a serious position. As this wis the third information defendant could not escape without some penalty. A fine of £5 with £1 9s costs would be imposed, in default 14 days’ hard labor. (Seven days were allowed in which to pav the fine. Defendant was also ordered to find sureties, one in £IOO or two in £SO each that lie would comply with the order ill future. Seven days were also allowed defendant to find the necessary sureties-: