Feilding R.M. Court.

Feilding Star, Volume IV, Issue 2, 14 June 1883, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court.

(Before K. Ward, Esq.. R.M.) Wednesday, June 4, 1883. ABUSIVE LANCTOAGB. Esfeven Bellve v John Campbell. Defendant was charged with using abusive language towards the plaintiff on May 31st, thereby provoking a breach of the peace. Plaintiff deposed : I am proprietor of the Empire Hotel ; on the day in question I was getting a cow released from, the pound, and in doing so the defendant insulted me. Plaintiff here quoted the words used. I gave him no provocation whatever. By defendant : Did you not say you protested against paying the poundage fees P By plaintiff: No, I did not. I said I I would pay them and also the damages. j John Robinson deposed : I remember I the day the cow was being driven to the i pound ; Mr Bellye gave me a shilling to j release the cow, which I paid ; I saw the I defendant driving the cow to the pound ; defendant called Mr Bellve certain namei (repeated). Mr McManus, poundkeeper, deposed : The two Campbells brought a cow to the pound and levied a pound damages done by the cow ; Mr Bellve came np and said he would pay the money ; I did not hear defendant use the language he is charged with ; I should have heard it had it been used. Defendant here made a statement to the effect that he informed plaintiff his cow had done a pound's worth of damage ; he said he would pay it ; I might have called him an old rascal, but nothing else.

W. Campbell corroborated his brother's evidence, excepting that he did not men* tion anything about boots. Defendant was fined 40s and costs. CIVII. CABBS. Crichton v Davies. This was a case of application for a re-hearing on the part of defendant. Plaintiff objected on the ground that the defendant was not present when the case was heard at the last Court day. Defendant said he came to the Court just fire minutes after the Court closed. Plaintiffs account was correct, but he had a set off. His Worship said that as this had not been duly filed, the application must be refused. M. 3L Samuel v Phippen. — Claim for £5 0s 6d for board and lodgings. Mr Prior for plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff and costs. G. C. Hill v Hoita.— Claim for £7 10s for plans and specifications. Judgment for plaintiff and costs. Bennett v Hori.— Claim for £2 19s Id for goods supplied and delivered. Mr Prior for plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff and costs. Same v Weti.— Claim for £4 12s 8d for goods supplied and delivered. .Mr Prior for plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff and costs. Nathan and Co. v Hamuera.— Claim for £ 15s 8s 9d for dishonored promissory note. Mr Esam for plaintiff. Mr Perkins, solicitor, proved the claim. Judg* ment for plaintiff and costs. Lewers v Davies. — Claim for £13 16s 6d for goods supplied. Mr Prior for plaintiff. Defendant put in a set off of £5 14s 4d for cheese supplied. William Taylor, formerly assistant to plaintiff, gave evidence as to a certain quantity of cheese being delivered by defendant in two lots. W. G. Haybittle deposed that in July last defendant brought him 117 lbs of cheese, and said he had taken some to Mr Lewers, and was going to take him some more, but could not say whether he did so. Judgment for £10 6s 9d and costs. Tompkins v Cameron. — Claim for £34 5s 3d, for goods supplied and delivered. Mr Prior for plaintiff and Mr Esam for defendant. Plaintiff was non-suited. A Clarke v T. Fraser.— Claim for £86 11s 8d for clearing and burning 180 acres of scrub and flax. MrHankins for plaintiff and Mr Esam for defendant. Angus Clarke, of Awahuri, doposed : I took the contract off defendant on the 3rd of July last, and was to be paid 10s per acre, two thirds as we went on, and the balance when finished. Defendant said there were about 180 acres, bnt it would be measured when done. I finished the job according to contract, bt^t he did not pay me for the work. Wheft I finished it he said I must not burn it before March • I was burning from the Ist of March to the 20th of April, but defendant never came near me ; it was a bad season for burning ; when I had done I asked Fraser to measure the land; he came and said he would not pass the work ; he refused to measure the land, and I engaged Mr Hill, of Feildini?, and paid him 5 guineas ; the measurement was 234 acres. Cross-examined : I finished the work according to a second contract ; my first agreement was not to dig out the flax with a spade ; I was not to grab np either the flax or scrub, nor to cut down the fern ; I have not left 20 or 30 acres in patches un burnt ; defendant said h« did not want the fern cut, as the pigtV would root it up when burned. Thomas Stewart deposed : I was present when the first contract was made* the agreement was to fell, clear and prepare for the plough; nothing was said about grubbing up the roots. < ross-examined : I swear plaintiff was positively ordered not to burn till Maroh. Jane F. •■ larke deposed : I remember my father having the contrast and assis*

ted him ; Mr Fraser came when we were burning some flaxbushes; he told father not to burn anything before March, and he stopped burning. Harry I opkins, laborer, Awahuri, deposed : I have had considerable experience in clearing and burning scrub, and I consider the job very fair T y done. Cross-examined : The roots of flax are not supposed to be grupped up to prepare land fcr the plough. J. T. Smart, farmer, Carnarvon, did not give any evidence ot any value. John Miller, farmer, Awahuri, deposed: The work was done as well as it could be, considering the weather. Cross-examined : A burning in the best season always leaves a number of sticks- unburned, but it would be the contractors duty to collect these and burn John Matthews, contractor, Awahuri, gave similar evidence, and added that the contract had been fairly carried out. Thomas Fraser, defendant, deposed : The arrangement with plaintiff was to cut down the scrub close to the ground, and mow down the fern, and he suggested to plaintiff that a spade would be the best thing to cut down the flax with ; the land was to be got ready for the plough ; the money already paid was the value he (defendant) placed upon the work actually done, and the balance was to be paid when the work was completed ; never altered the terms of the contract, but only suggested not burning the flax standing ; as to telling him not to burn the scrub before March, plaintiff said he wanted to go to harvest work, and he, witness, told him he would have plenty of time to do that, and could come back and burn what was left ; did not tell him what to do with the flax ; he might have eaten it for what witness cared, so long as he got rid of it ; the plaintiff's witnesses have sworn falsely if they stated that witness stopped the burning, and ordered it not to be done till March; the money paid was two-thirds of what he considered to be the yalue of the work done. Re-examined: There was no time specified for the work; will now say that he does not charge plaintiff's witnesses with perjury, but that they mistook advice for a positive order. A. McDonald deposed : There is much of the scrub not burned, and about half the fern is still standing. Cross-examined: He thought there would have been a better burn, if the stuff had been better cut. Robert Garrett, laborer, corroborated the evidence as to the roughness of the work, bad burning, &c. Gascoigne, farmer, Mount Stewart, deposed: There are large patches of manuka, through which the fire has not been at all. The counsel having addressed the Court at some length, his Worship deducted the charge for measuring the land, of which there was no evidence, also £20 for the fern not cut, reducing the claim to £61 11b Bd. He then gave judgment j for the plaintiff for that amount and costs. The Court then adjourned.