Title: Leeward Islands gazette
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076863/00283
 Material Information
Title: Leeward Islands gazette
Physical Description: reels. : ;
Creator: Leeward Islands (West Indies)
Publisher: Gov. Printing Office
Place of Publication: Antigua
Publication Date: 1872-
 Subjects
Subject: Politics and government -- Periodicals -- Leeward Islands (West Indies)   ( lcsh )
Genre: periodical   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Dates or Sequential Designation: 1- , 1872-
General Note: Two pages per frame.
General Note: Supplements, issued with some numbers, contain departmental reports, Meteorological registers, ordinances, statutory rules and orders, etc., of Antigua, St. Kitts and Nevis, Montserrat, and the British Virgin Islands.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076863
Volume ID: VID00283
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 001724221
notis - AJD6739
 Related Items
Succeeded by: Antigua, Montserrat and Virgin Islands gazette

Full Text









THE LEEWAY\ D ISi i

GAZ


Sub liHtH by utborit .

VOL. LXXXIII. THURSDAY, 3RD NOVEMBER, 1955.


Notices.

No. 109.
The Acting Governor has been
pleased to assent to the undermen-
tioned Ordinance:-
Antigua.
No. 8 of 1955 "The Building
Societies Ordinance, 1955 ".
Oct. 26
Ref. No. 47/00383.

In the Supreme Court of the
Windward Islands and
Leeward Islands.
(NEVIS CIRCUIT).
A.D. 1955.
NOTICE is hereby given that in
pursuance of Rules made by the Chief
Justice under Section 16 of the
Windward Islands and Leeward
Islands (Courts) Order-in-Council,
1939 and duly approved as therein
provided on the 16th day of October,
A.D. 1941, The Honourable the
Puisne Judge selected for the sitting
of the Court in the NEVIS CIRCUIT
has appointed the day of the month on
which the ensuing Circuit Court shall
sit as follows, that is to say:-
The NEVIS CIRCUIT on Wednes-
day the 30th day of November, 1955
at 10 o'clock in the forenoon.
Dated the 17th day of October, 1955.
A. R. MEADE,
Acting Registrar.
Ref. No. 36/00004.

TRADE MARKS OFFICE,
ANTIGUA, 31st Octob-r, 1955.
RADIO CORPORATION of
America of 30 Rockfeller Plaza, New
York, State of New York, United
States of America have applied for
Registration of one Trade Mark con-
sisting of the following:-


in Class 18 that is to say:-Electri-
cally operated room air conditioners



3 -. -7%-9 7

1^iS?i7t'


and air-conditioning equipment of all
kinds and for all purposes, parts
thereof and accessories thereto, such
as compressors, condensers, fans, fan
motors, regulators, thermostatically
controlled attachments, electrically
operated dehumidifier equipment
to control the moisture content of the
air, parts thereof and accessories
thereto.
Gas and electric ranges and stoves
for cooking and heating, parts thereof
and accessories thereto.
Electric and non-electric refrigera-
tors, storage freezers, parts thereof
and accessories thereto.
Gas oil and electric hot water heat-
ers, automatic oil and gas home and
space heaters, radiant circulators,
radiant circulator heaters, incinera-
tors, power lawn mowers, parts,
accessories and attachments thereto.
The Applicants claim that they
have used the said Trade Mark in
respect of the said goods for 32 years
before the date of their said Applica-
tion.
Any person may within three
months from the date of the first
appearance of this Advertisement in
the 'Leeward Islands Gazette,' give
notice in duplicate at the Trade Marks
Office, Antigua, of opposition to
registration of the said Trade Mark.
CECIL O. BYRON,
Acting Registrar of Trade Marks.

PROVOST MARSHAL'S OFFICE,
ANTIGUA, 3rd November, 1955.
Notice is hereby given that there
will be sold on the various premises
in the City of Saint John on Thurs-
day the 8th day of December, 1955
at 12 o'clock noon, the Lands and
Tenements belonging to the persons
hereinafter named, the same having
been levied upon to satisfy the City
Rate due thereon for the year 1955.
THE POINT.

Eileen C. and G. Reynolds, Alice
M. King, Heirs of Joseph Samuel,
Joseph Mathurin, Henrietta Graham,
Elmore G. Aska, Abraham Samuel.
MARINERS LANE.
SIsaline Perry, Ebenezer Christo-
pher, Irene Walker, Martha Finch,
Estate of J. P. Samuel.


WILKINSON STREET.
Norris Destin, Alice Jarvis, Joseph
James, Estate of Mary Benjamin,
Estate of Joseph Reynolds, Geo. W.
B. Bryson & Co.
WRAPPING LANE.
Anthony Jarvis, Estate of John
Ambrose, Rhoda Joshua, Samuel
Laviscount.
HAWKINS STREET.
Joseph Davis, Alma Thibou, Free
land E. Roberts.
HOOD STREET.
Agnes Mayhew, George B. Lake,
Joshua Thomas, James H. King.
FORT ROAD.
Calis Destin, Harold Scholar,
Joseph Thomas, Campbell Martin,
Neville Weston, Basil Saunders,
Pearl Hutchinson, Cecil Kendall, L.
E. George.
LONG STREET.
Antonetta Reid.
REDCLIFFE STREET.
Antigqa 0. F. Lodge.
SOUTH STREET.
Ellen Mason
CORN ALLEY.
Althea Lauhon.
TEMPLE STREET.
Ravely Murrain, Constance Hill,
Elish Challenger.
CROSS STREET.
Ruby Hughes, 0. St. A. Duke.
OTTOS LANE.
Gertrude Richards.
CECIL O. BYRON,
Acting Provost Marshal.

PROVOST MARSHAL'S OFFICE,
ANTIGUA.
27th October, 1955.

Notice is hereby given that there
will be sold on the various premises
in the City of Saint John on Thursday
the 25th day of November, 1955, at
12 o'clock noon, the Lands and
Tenements belonging to the persons
hereafter named:
HAMILTON'S LAND
David Anthony, Alphonso Hamil-


No. 48.


I; L)S










THE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE.


BENNETT STREET

Nathaniel Anthony, Eliza Jeffrey,
Ernest Gilead, Ursula Matthew, Olive
Hazlewood, Oscar Gilead, Kenneth
Henry, Iris Mussington.

ATHILL STREET
Sarah Mason, Lydia Small, Chris-
tiana Oliver, Thomas Henry.

CHRISTOPHER STREET
Albert Benjamin, Oliver Sherving-
ton, Adelaide Sweeney (4), Eunice
Hunte, Esther Christian, I.ydia Small.

PIGOTT STREET
Iris Mussington, Josephine Grigg,
Nathaniel Anthony.
BRYSON STREET
Nathaniel White, Beatrice Julian,
Pearl Hutchinson, Evelyn George,
Charlotte Tobitt, Henry Edwards,
Susanah Baptiste.

ALFRED PETERS SI'REET
Louisa Mannix, Gwendolyn Hunte,
Charles Anthony, Leslie Samuel,
Mildred Orr, Irene Roberts.

DICKENSON BAY STREET
Alfred Tanner, Sarah Stuart,
Nehemiah Knight, Ernest Lloyd
White, Arthur James, Alfred Simon,
Estate of Hagar Cann, George
William, Margaret Josiah, Archibald
Weston, Lucy Jack.

ST. GEORGE'S STREET
Ickford Winter (2), Estate of
Charles Davis, Adelaide Williams,
Mary Wells, Leonard Benjamin,
Samuel Billington, Estate of Stephen
Melvin (2), Mary Chapman, Caroline
Albert, Jeremiah Simon, Alex Maria
Watson, Eleanora Manderson.

ST. JOHN'S STREET.
Foster E. L. Matthew, Wilfred
Weathland, Igal Winter (3), Edward
Townsend, Sarah Calquhoun, George
Weston, Johannah John and others,
Cecelia Christian (2), Estate o f
Rebecca Christian, Alicia Hunte,
Victoria James,. James S. Beazer.

BISHOPGATE STREET,
Reginald Jarvis, Estate of Ada
Jarvis, Leslie Chambers, Heirs of
James Cephas, D. Vann, James Mapp,
Centilia Simon, James Hart. Heirs of
Ledeatt, James B. Hart, Josephine
Edwards, Heirs of Rev. Francis,
Sarah Tuitt, Thomas Williams, Heirs
of Ann Laviscount.

NEVIS STREET.
Brown Brothers, Ulotrician Society,
Elma Potter, Estate of Thomas Byam,
Heirs of Eliza Bennett, Bertha Buck-
ley, Annie Sahalie.


TANNER STREET.

Estate of Francis O'Harro, Heirs of
Barton, Ravely Murrain.

SOUTH STREET.

Robert Gallawey, Estate of John
Chalmers, Tryphene Joseph, Joseph
H. Martin, Florence Sowerby.

CHURCH LANE.

Heirs of Edward King.

OTTOS LAND.

Algar Tuitt, David E. Joseph,
George Farley.

OTTOS LANE.

Gertrude Richards, Sarah Robins,
Elvinia Edmund (2).

NELSON STREET.

Albertha Parker, Thomas Warner,
Ephraim John.

The same having been levied upon
to satisfy the City Rate due thereon
for the year 1955.

CECIL O. BYRON,
Acting Provost Marshal.


TENDER FOR BUILDING
FISHING BOAT.

Tenders are invited for the build-
ing of one decked fishing boat to be
fitted with a motor but fully rigged
for use as a sailing vessel only.


2. The dimension
be as follows:
Length overall
Beam

Depth at midship
Width of Transom

Depth of Transom
Length of Spar
Boom
The deck should be


of the boat to

25 feet
8 feet
10 inches
4 feet
5 feet
6 inches
4 feet
30 feet
24 feet
cambered.


3. Applications should be marked
'Tender for building Boat," and
should be addressed to His Honour
the Commissioner, Plymouth, Mont-
serrat, who does not bind himself to
accept the highest or any tender.
Such tenders should be submitted in
time to be received not later than the
12th November, 1955.

By Order,

S. L. HENRY,
Agricultural Superintendent.


Montserrat Secondary School

VACANT POST OF ASSISTANT
MASTER.


Applications are invited for
appointment to the post of Assistant
Master at the Montserrat Secondary
School, which is a co-educational
institution.

2. The duties of the post are to
teach mainly History and English to
Cambridge Higher School Certificate
standard, and the person selected will
be expected to assist in the extra-
curricular activities of the School-
Games, Debating and Dramatic
Society, and Glee Club.

3. A degree in History or English
of a University within the British
Commonwealth is required.

4. The post, which is pensionable,
carries a salary of $2292-108-2400-120-
$3120/-120-3360, and the successful
candidate will be appointed on proba-
tion for a period of two years, and
will be subject to Colonial Regula-
tions and local General Orders.

5. Free passages for person
selected, his wife and not more than
three children under the age of
eighteen years will be provided.
Vacation leave and leave passage
grant are earned in accordance with
General Orders.

6. Applications giving full details
of qualifications and experience and
accompanied by not less than two
testimonials, should be addressed to
His Honour the Commissioner,
Montserrat, B.W.I., to reach him not
later than the 26th November, 1955.

Commissioner's Ofice,
Montserrat, B. W.I.
18th October, 1955.
Ref. No; 0. 13/00010.


RAINFALL FIGURES.
Central Experiment Station,
Antigua.


Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct. 29


1951.
3.60
1.68
1.09
2.16
10.54
2.74
3.28
9.18
12.06
3.84


1952.
3.10
1.60
1.62
3.14
3.07
5.74
8.38
8.43
5.55
5.13


1951.
2.55
1.02
5.60
2.06
1.50
1.31
3.20
3.15
2.10
.85


1955.
2.16
.68
.83
1.75
2.81
1.47
2.18
8.25
5'59
4.08


50.37 45.07 22.72 38.11 29.75


[3 November, 1955.


184









THE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE.


IN THE SUPREME COURi' OF THE WINDWARD ISLANDS AND LEEWARD ISLANDS.

ANTIGUA CIRCUIT-ON APPEAL FROM THE MAGISTRATE'S COURT DISTRICT A ".
WALTER STANLEY SOUTHWELL-Complaineant-Appellant
V.
REGINALD HENRY -Defendant-Respondent.

The Crown Attorney, Mr. McNAMARA for the Appellant.
The Defendant in person
Mr. LOUIS LOCKHART as amicus teriI
The Defendant-Respondent Reginald Henry was brought before the learned Acting District Magistrate for
District "A on a charge of larceny of 3 books value $1.44 and $1.00 currency.
The Magistrate on the hearing of the case found the charge proved as regards the three books but under
Sec. 2 (1) (b) of Cap 44 (The Probation of Offenders Act) discharged the Defendant conditionally on his entering into
a recognizance to be of gocd behaviour and to appear for conviction and sentence when called upon at any time during
a period of six months and that he report to the probation officer every two weeks.
The Acting Crown Attorney pursuant to Section 180 (5) (a) of the Magistrate's Code of Procedure Act Cap. 61
as amended by Act No. 13 of 1954 requested the Magistrate to state a case as to whether the said Acting Magistrate
having found the charge proved, it was competent and legal for him under Section 2 (1) of Cap 44 to put the
Defendant-Respondent on Probation.
It would appear from the reasons given by the Magistrate for his decision- that no conviction was in fact
recorded and it would appear that the only basis for putting a defendant on Probation under Cap. 44 Section 2 (1) is
that there should be no conviction recorded.
There would seem to he no doubt that if the learned Magistrate in coming to a decision had been guided by
the considerations set forth in Section 2 of Cap 41 he would have had the power to put the Defendant on probation.
It would appear however from the reasons given by the Magistrate that
(a) he regarded the offence as of a trivial nature.
(b) that the fact that the books stolen had been returned; was one of the reasons for his act.
(c) that having regard to the demeanour of the defendant the Magistrate concluded that he was a man
mentally dissipated by drink.
(d) that he also gave consideration to the fact that where on previous occasions the Defendant had been
convicted of similar offenc,-s he had been sentenced to prison and never had been bound over or put
on probation.
With regard to (6) and (d) I do not think it necessary for me to comment except to say that these are not
grounds under Cap. 44 that the Magistrate could take into consideration. As regards (a)-I cannot agree that an
offence of larceny can ever be considered trivial". As regards (c)-While Cap. 44 empowers the Magistrate to take
into consideration the mental condition of the offender-expert testimony should be called to satisfy the Magistrate in
the score of the mental condition of the defendant and certainly a state of dissipation with drink at the time of hear-
ing should not affect the Magistrate's judgment favourably to the defendant as to the punishment to be inflicted.
The Magistrate in my opinion did not on the grounds he has given, have the power to discharge the Defend.
ant and to put him on probation under Section 2 (1) of Cap. 44.
Section 180 (5) (a) appears in the Magistrate's Code of Procedure for the first time by Act No. 13 of 1954 and
apparently gives the Attorney General power to require a Magistrate to state a case in a point of law even where no
right of appeal exists under Section 172 as amended by Act No. 13 of 1954.
I am satisfied as stated earlier herein that the learned Magistrate was wrong in the circumstances to put the
Defendant on probation as none of the reasons given for this act come properly under Section 2 (1) of Cap. 44. The
question arises however whether an appeal by the Attorney General under Section 180 (5) of Cap. 61 as amended by
Act No. 13 of 1954 would justify the Court in remitting the case to the Magistrate with directions that he must convict
and impose a penalty permitted by law or whether the judgment is to be considered merely as an authoritative opinion
-on a point of law by a Judge to be used for the guidance of Magistrates in future matters that come before them.
I have noted an article appearing in the October issue of the 1954 Criminal Law Review page 560 referring
to an amendment passed in 1951 to the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 of New South Wales whereby the Counsel for the
Crown in a case heard on indictment where there has been a dismissal of the accused may request the trial judge
(upon the written consent of the Attorney General) "to reserve for decision by the Court of Criminal Appeal any
question of law arising at or in connection with the trial". It is expressly stated in the New South Wales Act how-
ever that the acquittal of the accused shall in no wise be invalidated and that the Defendant remains immune from
conviction. Section 180 of Cap. 61 as amended has no such provision and it is at least open to question whether in a
situation as herein the Court's decision on the point of law raised by-a case stated under Section 180 (5) should not be
regarded merely as a more authoritative finding of the law for the guidance of the Magistrates in the future.
I am of the opinion that on an appeal under Section 180 (5) as amended by Act No. 13 of 1954 the accused
should not in any way be affected by the judgment of the Court and the Court's opinion should be considered as
merely for the 'guidance of the Magistrates in the future. This opinion therefore does not affect the rights of the
Defendant-Respondent, and the judgment herein given, should be considered as merely a guide to the Magistrates
in similar cases coming before them for consideration.
The Court is of the opinion that the learned Magistrate was wrong in binding over the Defendant for the
reasons given and I direct that the Magistrates be directed in similar cases coming before them that a defendant should
not be put on probation except the putting on probation is justified by the reasons given in Section 2 (1) of Cap 41 of
the Federal Acts of the Leeward Islands.
Dated the i9th day of September, 1955.
SYDNEY T. CHRISTIAN,
Acting Puisne Judge.


3 November, 1955.1









186 THE LEEWARD ISLANDS GAZETTE. [3 Novenmltr, 1955.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE WINDWARD ISLANDS AND LEEWARD ISLANDS.

ANTIGUA CIRCUIT

On appeal from the Magistrate's Court Distriot "A"
WALTER STANLEY SOUTHWELL Complainant-Appellant
V.
ROBERT MURRAIN and JOSEPH MURRAIN Defendant-Respondents.
The Crown Attorney, Mr. MCNAMARA for the Appellant
Mr. C. E. FRANCIS for the Respondents.
This is an appeal by way of stated case under Section 180 (5) (a) of the Magistrate's Code of Procedure Act,
Cap. 61 as amended by Act No. 13 of 1954 from the decision of the Acting learned Magistrate for District A by
which he dismissed charges brought against the Defendants of having in their possession a quantity of sugar reason-
ably suspected of having been stolen or unlawfully obtained contrary to Section 44 (3) of Cap. 67 of the Revised
Edition (1927) of the Laws of the Lev-ward Islands.
The case was dismissed by the Magistrate at the end of the case for the prosecution on the grounds that the
value of the sugar had not been proved by the prosecution and in all cases of Larceny the value of the article alleged
to be stolen should he proved by the prosecution and the Magistrate cannot take judicial notice that the two tins of
sugar which were put in evidence had any value-since value of thing stolen was an essential ingredient of a larceny
charge.
The question raised by this appeal is whether the decision of the Acting Magistrate was erroneous in law in
that he considered evidence of value of the thing reasonably suspected of having been stolen or unlawfully obtained a
necessary part of the case for the prosecution in a charge under Section 44 (3) of the Small Charges Act as substituted
by Act No. 14 of 1955.
The learned Crown Attorney urged that the charge was under Section 44 (3) of the Small Charges Act as
substituted by Act No. 14 of 1955; that this section makes no reference to any value and is within the jurisdiction of
the Magistrate under Section 29 (d) of Cap. 61; that there was no duty therefore oi the prosecution to prove that the
goods reasonably suspected of having be-n stolen or unlawfully obtained had any value.

Mr. Francis, for the Respondent argued that on the facts proved, a charge of larceny should have been
brought against the Defendant; that the offence charged was so akin to larceny that the principles of the law of
larceny apply and that the law of larceny necessitates that it must be proved that the thing stolen was of some value.
Here there was no evidence of value given and that the learned Magistrate even though the sugar was put in evidence
was not permitted to take judicial notice that the thing put in evidence was of any value at all and in consequence the
learned Magistrate was right in dismissing the case for the prosecution.
It should be borne in mind however, whatever may be the law of larceny as to proof of some value, that the
charge the Defendants were facing was that of being in possession of some sugar reasonably suspected of being stolen
or unlawfully obtained and that the section under which the chlaige was brought made no mention of the value of the
article.
Whatever may be the necessity in a charge of larceny the Court is of the opinion that on the charge which
the Defendants were facing no necessity existed for the value of the articles found in the possession of the defendants
to be proved.
The question still remains however as to the effect of an appeal under Section 180 (5) (a) of Cap. 61 as
amended.

In a stated case similarly brought under this Section 180 (5) (a) (Southwell v. Henry) the Court has held
as to the effect of an appeal by the Attorney General under Section 180 (5) (a) that the rights of the Respondent are
not affected even if the Court is satisfied that the Magistrate's decision was wrong and the findings of this Court are
to be considered merely as an advisory opinion for the future guidance of the Magistrate. No order is therefore made
as to the conviction and sentence of the Defendants herein though this Court finds that the learned Magistrate erred
in his decision when the cases were before him.
The Court may add however that it does not agree that if even the charge was larceny the Magistrate on
seeing the article alleged to be stolen need have proof offered that the article was of the value of the smallest coin of
the realm-one farthing-if it is satisfied that it is of some value, however small, to the person from whom the article
is taken. (Archbold's Criminal Pleadings 33rd Edition page 575 and R. v. Morris 9 C. & P. 349). Statement of value
and proof thereof is only necessary where value is an essential ingredient of the offence as in a charge under Section
13 of the Larceny Act 1944.

Dated the 19th day of September, 1955.
SYDNEY T. CHRISTIAN,
Acting Puisne Judge.






ANTIGUA.
Printed at the Government Printing Offoe, Leeward Islandf, by E. M. BLAc&KAN,
Government Printer.-By Authority
19fi5.
[Price 6 cents)




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs