MAGISTERIAL.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXVI, Issue 3561, 22 September 1916, Page 4

MAGISTERIAL.

ASH BURTON—THIS DAY.

(Beforo Mr V. G. Day, S.M.)

Exemption from Drill

C. C. Chisnall, of Hinds, applied for exemption from drill. . The applicant,said, he was a married man, and had a farm of 700 acres to look after. His brother was going to the front, and he (applicant) would have to lonic after that property also.

His AVorsliip: What mortgage is on your farm I-—About 5s to 6s per acre,.

What revenue do you derive from your property I- I—About1 —About £250 a year. Mr A. M. Thatcher, W. 0., opposed the application. ]!o said that the applicant had five brothers, and none of them -had gone to the front. All the brothers had farms, and there was no reason why applicant should not da his drill. In reply to Mr Thatcher, applicant said ho was married eight months ago. His Worship said that Chisnall had' no grounds for exemption. The application would be refused. Exceeding Speed Limit. A ; John Bladder, Borough Inspector,, proceeded against a number of motor- ' ists for exceeding the speed-limit. The following we m lined 20s and costs for driving cars at an excessive .speed ml the Borough:—J. J.J. Anderson, Arthur Broom, E. J. Longley, and William Olson. The following wore fined 20s and costs for motoring too fast over the . Ashburton traffic bridge:—William* Quirk. Henry Mc:l>ll:ind, John Davidson. R. Wilson, and 1?. Acton Adams. Mr C. \V. Punu'll prosecuted on behalf of the County Inspector. Sale of a Gig. A. Bronmer sought to recover the sum of £15 from John Robertson,, being the value of a gig told by plaintiff to defendant., Mr Acland appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Buchanan for defendant. Plaintiff, in evidence, said that ho sold the gig to defendant, who kepi it about six weeks and then said h© was not satisfied, and refused to pay. By Mr Buchanan: When defendant first saw tho gig he said ho would take it. Witness told defendant that the gig was sound and in good order. Defendant later saw witness, and said he was not satisfied with tho gig, as the wheel and shaft Mere broken. Witness did not tell defendant that ho could return the gig. « Edward New, coach-painter, said the gig in question . was taken into his shop to by paiuted. Robertson had a. look at the. gig before, it was painted. To his Worship: Witness found nothing wrong with the gig. For tho defence. John Robertson said he" went round to New's garage tosee a gig which Bremnor 'wanted to sell. .The gig was lying in pieces ready ■ for tho painter. He looked over it ■ roughly. Bremner told, witness that the.gig was all right. When witnessgot the gig he discovered th.it one of the shafts was faulty and that the spokes of one wheel were very .loose. Witness told Bremner that the gig was not satisfactory. Br-omner then said he could bring it back. His Worship said there was no doubt that defendant had agreed to purchase the gig, and he could not say that plaintiff had agreed to take it back. Jxidgment would be for nlaintiff for. the amount claimed, with costs (£3" Is).

Civil Cases.

Judgment was given for plaintiff, by default, in the following civil actions:; Robert Kennedy ,v. Mrs McClintocfc, ■, claim for £3 (costs ss) • Edward O'Connor v. «T. Beech, claim for £5 14s (costs £1 4s 6d).