ONEHUNGA.

Auckland Star, Volume I, Issue 94, 28 April 1870, Page 3

ONEHUNGA.

In the Kesident Magistrate's Court, on "Wednesdaj, 27th April, bofore Captain Symonds E.M., the following cases were heard : — DISOHDEKLY CONDUCT. Gk B. Leray was charged with disorderly conduct at Howick. The constable deposed that he took prisoner into custody. He was annoying travellers by whistling in their fac«s; he did not seem drunk, but he did not appear to be right in his mind; prisoner had deeds and a, considerable quantity of property on his person. The Court dismissed the prisoner with an admonition. CIVIL CASES. North wood v. Carey.—Claim 10a. for wages. The plaintiff's mother appeared and said that her daughter was the party claiming her wages ; since leaving her situation she had married and gone to the Kaipara. The mother having no written authority to sue, plaintiff was non-suited. Hodgson v. Robb.—Claim 10s. for damages done by ducks. J. Hodgson stated that he had a crop of oats, in a paddock, defendant's ducks were often in tho crop and did a great amount of damage ; he had repeatedly warned defendant, and offered to buy the ducks. —Jacob Wright valued the damage done at forty shillings, and the porportion of damage claimed of defendant was a balance, the owner of some fowls having paid thirty shillings.—For the defence, J. Hastie deposed that the whole damage done was about fifteen shillings.—J. A. Stewart gave a similar valuation.—The plaintiff having nlready received thirty shillings from one party, the Court give judgment for ss. and costs.

Leonard v. Young. — Claim £27 Is., balan^o of account. —There being no appearance/:" defendant, plaintiff prored his case, fc? >the Court gave judgment by default with c«*ts.

Avery and Grimes v. Vercoo. —Claim for wages, £1 16s. 3d.—Plaintiffs stated that they made an agreement to do some ditching for defendant at ss ; per chain. We completed eleven chains and a half. When we came to some hard stuff we asked for a higher rate, and he refused to pay us for what we had done.—Mr. Tercoe, deposed that plaintiffs engaged to complete a ditch a certain length to a junction with another ditch, giving a fall of thirty inches at the junction. The menleft off, complaining they could not Hiuke wages As they did not complete the contract, I refused to pay them. When they

applied for more wages, I !old tl.ein I would meet them if I could. They loft the work on Monday, and I subsequently put" on o.'licr men at Bs. per chain.—Mr. Scott an adjoining farmei', corroborated ?>lr. Yercoe's avidence. — Plaintiffs were nonsuited with costs.