The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle. — 1872-08-24 (Stourbridge, West Midlands, England)

CASE.—Thomas Silvester was charged with assaulting Edward Drummond, on the 21st inst The defendant was further charged with being drunk and riotous. and assaulting the police. The cases were proved and defendants fined 10s 111 and costs in each ease ; in default three weeks' hard labour in each case.  DEFICIENT WEIGHTS AND MEASUBEs.—SaDaIIeI Webb, of Wordelev, was charged by George Border, Inspector of Veights and Measures, with having in his possession on the sth,. pair of unjust scales. Mr. Murder said the scales were one ounce against the purchaser. Fined £2 and coats.—William Hill, provision dealer, of Brettell Lane, was charged with having in his shop on the 17th, an unjust pair of seethe. Mr. Border proved that the scales we. 3 drachms against the purchaser, which had been canoed by putting a piece of lead upon them. The defendant sajd the lead was always on the scales. Mr. Spooner remarked that defendant had had a fine opportunity for plundering the public, and he would take some of the profit off by fining him £5 and costs.—Henry Parkes, provision dialer, Brettell Lane, was charged with having unjust scales which were i.z. out of balance against the buyer. Fined 4:2 and costs.—William Sins mends, butcher, of Brettell Lane, was charged with has. Gig one unjust weight in his possession, on the 17th. It was proved that the weight was 2 drachms against the purchaser. Other weights were slightly light. Defendant said he had borrowed the weight. Fined El and costa.—Thomas Brecham,provision dealer, of the Delph, was charged with having unjust scales, on the 17th. Mr. Herder proved that the flour scales were ioz. against the purchaaer. Defendant was fined £5 and costs.—John Bache, of Mount Pleasant, was charged with having unjust scales in his possession, on the 17th. Mr. Herder said the scales were ioz. against the purchaser. Defendant's beings small shop, Le was fined I:2 and costs.— David Ashton, butcher, of Quarry Bank, was charged with having an unjust pair of scales in his possession, on the 17th. The evidence proved that the scales werei on out of balance. Fined £2 and costs.—John Hand, greengrocer, of the Dolph, was charged with having an unjust weight in his possession. 'lke evidence proved that the ltb weight was toz. against the purchaser. Defendant said thv deficiency was caused by the weight having Leen dropped by the children. The other weights were correct. Fined 2t/s and costs—Storer Shepley, grocer, of Brietley Hill, with having a pair of unjust scales. Mr. Hinder said they were 81 drachms against the purchaser. Defendant said they had been injured by a fall two or three days previonely. Mr. Spooner said be had defrauded the public. and knew it at the time.as he showed die defects to the Inspector, aid he should try sod pot • stoje to it, and fined defendant £5 and costa.—Ederin Cox, provision dealer, of Quarry Bank, with having a pair of unjust scales, caused by a piece of lead having been put round them, which had made them joy. against the purchaser. Mr. Clulow, for the defence, said his client was in a L r,re way of nueiness, and where the scales were found was a small shop. His wife attended to it. All her weights were found correct, and he had twelve sets of scales, ore only of which was defective; and he thought the ease was different from that of some others who had wilfully offended. Mr. Spooner remarked that if defendant wanted an expression from the Bench, lie would say that it was as hails ease as say that had come before him, and he should line him £5 and costs.—William Dudley, prevision dealer, Wordeley, was charged with havingenujust scales in Dia possersi.m. Mr. Holberton defended. Complainant said that the defendant was weighing paper with sugar, and he saw him weighing a pound, and the paper was sz. against the purchaser. Mr. Hoibet ton mad that defendant did mitt think he was doing wrong. It was the eastern of grocers to weigh the paper, end defendant bad read a notice from the Board of 'Trade to the effect that they were not aware of any law to prevent Omni weighing the paper. This, he considered different to the other cases. Mr. Spooner said he would rant him a ease if Le liked, and as this was the first case of the kind in that district. he would only order defendant to pay costs.