MAGISTERIAL.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume v, Issue 1533, 15 April 1887, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

ASHBURTON— FRIDAY.

(Before Mr H. O. S Baddeley R.M.)

CIVII OASES. Sprott Broa. v. Bule, c'aim°£6o.— Mr Wilding for plaintiff, Mr Pornell for defendant. It was stated that the case had been withdrawn. Rule v. Sprott Bros , claim £40, and came v. aame, claim £20.— Mr Purnoll for plaintiff, Mr Wilding for defendant. In these caiea the Magistrate now gave his judgment aa follows ;— Rule v Sprott, £40— This is a claim for damages for trespass on land with horses, drays, &o, destruction of pasture, &c, and remaining on the land for six weeks. The queßtton of title has been raised, and that 1 must overrule. I cannot help expressing great regret that all the cases between these parties have not been settled by friendly intervention. As thia was not the oase, I must decide. I cannot, af lor hearing the evidence m this matter, agree that the smallest coin m the realm ahou d be the amount awarded ; on the contrary I oonsider that this is one of the coo!es>t trespasses I have heard of for some timo. The defendant took no trouble to ask leave, and there tan be no doubt from Mr Roberts, clear and petfectly independent evidence that only Rule could grant such leave. Sprott had ample warning moreover, but persisted m his trespass, and must pay the penalty. Certain losses and expenßes have been clearly proved, and the defendants must make them go^d, Tho judgment will be for £30 and costs. Rule v Sprott. £20. — Thiß is an action for damages for tresspass of defendant's sheep on plaintiff's land at Pendarves on divers days during July, August, and September, 1886, whereby plaintifl's pasture was ate, fences were broken, and plaintiff's Bheep mixed. . A great deal has been said respecting the defective fences of the plamtiff, but owners " of sheep are bound to see that they do not trespass Sprott must have known what steps ho could take under tho Fencing Act relative to giving notice to repair m the absence of any agreement. It is quite clear Sprott's sheep were not properly looked after. I conclude from the evidence that Sprott's cheep (which aro evidently good fencers) did a very natural thing when their own feed ran out, namely, migrated to pastures new, where there was good feed, the furrows that had been ploughed up, probably too high against the fence, lending them possibly friendly aid. In this case the full amount sued for has been proved, and judgment will be for the amount claimed and costs. Oliver v. Sheppard, olaim £10.— Mr Outhbertaon for plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed and coats. Duncan v. McEeczle, olaim £1 7a Od. Judgment for pk'ntlff for amount claimed •nd coata. Foster v. Dyner, c^im £6 10a.— Mr Caygill for plaintiff, Mr Wilding for defendant* — Thia was an action for the recovery of money alleged to have been i wrongfully claimed by the defendant and naid to him m error by the plaintiff. ' A man ramed Holmes, who had beo i engaged by Foster to cut acme whe_.t, •ent Dy nea to start on the work. Holmea •ued tbe plaintiff and recovered judgment, among other monies, for the amount paid to Dynei. The plaint 'ff therefore Bought to reoover from Dyne) tho sum. The defendant resisted reimbursing the plaintiff on several ground*, but principally that at tbe time tho work for wliijh bo had be<?n paid was pei formed he nr3 Foster's and not Homes servant. Aft r evidence had been heard at length, th j Magistrate gave judgment for the plaintiff for the amount claimed ar.d cos's, Leave was given to the defendant to tppeal. THE WILSON C*SE. Samuel Thomson the licensee of ths ( Alford Forest Hotel, was charged with having permitted drunkenness on hia licensed premises Tbe csbo had been partly heard on a previoiu Conrt day when it had been adj mrned m order th^t the defendant might secure the ettendanca of a wltneaa whom he alleged to be material to his case — Mr Wildiog, now ap peared for the d.fendant, whi wished to withdraw the plea of "not guilty" ani plead " guilty "to the charge. Mr Wilding addressed the Bench, asking for the defendant to be dealt Lniently with He said Thompson waa ahortly leaving the hotel, which waa one of those which should not be suffered to exist, being ono m whioh it waa almost impossible for a man to get an honest living. The fau'fc was not so much that of the licensee a-i . of the persons who owned the hotel aud put theae men m it. Thompson was Bhortly leav ng the hotel and he bad a wife and young family to keep who, waro a heavy penalty itflicted, would be tbo teal sufferers, and m view of there circumstances he would aak the Magistrate to deal as ligh'ly with the defendant tn possible — 'lhe Magistrate agreed with Mr Wilding's remarks regarding thecbaractc • of hotela such aa thia one — Sergent Feltcn -said tbat he knew Thompson was not m a position to pay a heavy fieo At tb« last meeting of the Licensing Committee a renewal of hia licence wai iefuied to Thompson, and he was givti throe months m whioh to find a BuaceaHor, » proviso being made that if any oomplai> t, against the houae were established m thi meantime the Hcen3e would not on any account be granted. This being the oats then,and Thompson not being able to pay • heavy fine, he would aek the Magistrate to make an order under the 205 th clause of the LicßDßing Act closing lhe honae. —The Magistrate eald that ho had no power to make eaoh an order, the clause being one that solely applied to Licensing Commltteea. He hoped, however, th. t the police would strongly recommend the closing of the hotel to tho Licensing Committee. — Sergeant Felton Bald that he would feel it his duty to strongly oppose any fresh liconae being granted. Indeed he waa aire one wou'd not be granted unless the Licensing Committte swallowed the words they made use cf at their Jaat meeting — After Borne further remarks, the Magistrate said he agreed with the slaUmi.nt that had been made that the hcr.i>e was ono cf those m whioh an honest living could not be mado. The owner should pay the fines Ir Aided on the lioanaee. — Mr Wilding said the owner was not m a position to do ao. The Magistrate said thit the penalty ho was going to inflict would net be bo heavy SB it w. aid have been were it not for tho representations of Mr Wilding and the police. Still the fiuo would have to be a heavy one aa the case was tbe worst of Ita kind, tho conclusion being the most desßStroua possible, tho man In regard to whom tbe charge had been laid having died. Thompson wculd bo fined £25 ] nnd costs —Mr Wilding asked for time m j which to p-»y tho fine.— The Magistrate aaked tbe police if there was any cbanoe of tbe defendant clearing out. — Sergeant Felton sud Thompson had no hold on the hotel and the police would have to ask tne Bench to fix a term of imprisonment m default of payment. — 7 he Magistrate made an order tbat the defendant should be imprisoned for two months m caao uo did not meet the fine. The conviotion was ordered to be endorsed or. the i.cento. The Court then rose.