RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.
Friday, December 5. (Before I, N. Watt, Esq,, R.M.) Drunkenness -Mary Thomson’s name was called for a charge of drunkenness, but '■ub-lnspeotor Mallard said that accused had positively refused to walk from the Police ’station to the Court. He did not know her reason, but had no alternative but to onier her back to the cell. -Che case was remanded till to-morrow. CIVIL CASKS. stamper v. Rogers.—Claim LI6 ss, for dishonored promissory note. Judgment by default for am >uut elaime l, with costs, Reger v, Wallace.—Claim Ll9, for damage to property. Mr Haggitt appeared for plaintiff; Mr Harris for defendant.—John W, Feger, plaintiff, said defendant occupied a house belonging to him at Caversham, The house was about eighteen months old, and when defendant rented it, it was in very good repair and fresh painted. Defendant loft the house about ten weeks ago, and witness found it in a most filthy state : calves had been slaughtered in one of the rooms, the lireplace in the kitchen was destroyed, and there were “ight or nine dray loads of offal in the yard. Witness had to employ men to clean the place, repair' the lireplace, and repaint the house, at an ex ■ pense of even more than the arm unit claimed. Cross-examined : I he house belonged to witness, but the ground belonged to Ids wife. Had no written authority from the latter to sue defendant, but had a verbal one. The previous tenant, named Carter, was a meat seller but not a slaughterer. Defendant did not say, when he gave up the key, that it was witness’s own fault that he was leaving, because he would not repair the house. Did not send an account to defendant before suing him, hut he acted on legal advice in not doing so. It was a Dunedin lawyer who gave that an vice ; in fact, it was Mr -'topt, Elizabeth Carter said she and her husband at one time occupied plaintiffs house, and when they left, it was in good repair and clean. Cross-examined : Witness’s husband earned on a butchery business and made sausages in one of the rooms. —George Funnel), laborer ; feter Hudson, bricklayer; and Charles Goodall, gardener, gave evidence as to the state of the house before they effected the repairs for plaintiff. [Left sitting.]
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18731205.2.11
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Evening Star, Issue 3368, 5 December 1873, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
384RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. Evening Star, Issue 3368, 5 December 1873, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.