Feilding R.M. Court.

Feilding Star, Volume VI, Issue 114, 12 March 1885, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court.

Whdnesdat, Maboh 11, 1886; (Before R Ward, Esq., E.M.O ASSAULT AHD BATTKBY. „ , — . I James Moffatt was charged, with unlawfully assaulting William Gampbell by striking him in the face^riui clenched hand on the 9th inst. .Mr Staite appeared for the informants The accused, who was undefended, pleaded provocation as the reason lor the assault. ,• : ■■■.-.' ■•:■, a ■ William Campbell, who appeared with marks from a blow on the face, - gave evidence of the assault, iwhfch was entirely unprovoked ■;< was j Molding at his shop door, whenidefendant asked him to have a drink; he refused, whereupon defendant ati once struck him in the face, producing the mirks shown. •• ■■■ ■■■•■■• . = -rr '. v jj;i ti-.iit Matthew Belfit deposed, to .seeing the blow struck ; there was no pttMrocation in his hearing, i -. :»t. \ :j i — . & Thomas Budson, saddler; of Feeding, was called, but did not appear; James Moffat, the defendant* was sworn, and said he was provoked by the complainant in Hastie's: hotel hf being called bad names ; there was a quarrel between Campbell and T three other men, and witness kept these from striking Campbell when he used th* language quoted. ■ r :! For tne defence, James Ewing depoßedto being at Hastie's hote^ an 4 hearing what was going on; it' was another man who struck Campbell; could not say if he (witness) was sober; Dick Bowler knocked Campbell' down twice, and made the marks an his f tee. Another witness named 'Simpson gave similar evidence ; was sure it was Bowler who made the marks on complainant's face. *? '•>■;:■:' T Richard Bowler was called* but did not appear. . .„ . i £ Constable Meehan was called : tbrstate if Campbell was sober, and' said he came to him in a rather. excited state. Hi Defendant was fined 20s and'eost*; total, £2 10s. CIVIL CABSB. Prior and Sandilands v Wm Rapley. — Claim, £8 17s, being balance of account for money lent and interest. W. A. Sandilands proved tl^e debt. Judgment for plaintiffs and costs. , * .'-, - . Manchester Koad Board > V John Eirkwood. — Claim 4s 3d , for rates. Judgment for plaintiffs and costs.) Eortonand Curtis V W. Ai Xaghtbourne. — Claim £4 12s Bd. rMr P^or for plaintiJEEs. A letter.from defendant was produced, acknowledging the debt, and enclosing £l on account. Juagmentwas given for the balance and costs. lightband and Allan v Takana and Areta Pekama. Judgment if OX;: tfie claim of £l 17s 6d and costs. £. J. Cottrell v E: Bellve,^Claito £4 4e. Mr Staite for plaintiff and Mr Sandilands for defendant. Plaintiff deposed to a man nanffo Morrison being indebted to him si)ffie time ago, and by an arrangement which witness explained the debt was transferred to Bellve, in whose emploY Morrison was. ; ! - ~ l * The defence was that there were conditions attached to the arrangement, which had not been fulfilled, and there was no consideration for tiro claim. v -r.-t Esteven Bellve, the defendant, save evidence as to engaging to 'pay the money conditionally on Morrwon 'returning to work for him, which he did not, and consequently witness had hafi uo consideration, whatever; plaintiff was present, and knew of 'the conditions. • •-■';'.. ; -j-.-y-f Both witnesses were 'closely and lengthily examined, and also answered a number of questions from the Bench. George Knowles deposed to being present , when the arrangement tow made; the promise to pay was on t^e condition oi Morrison wdrkhigit o»t. Both counsel addressad the court at some length, Mr Sandiland: urging for i verdict , for the defensant^?n the i grounds of there being conations and 10 consideration, and Mr Staite con;ending that the claim, was on a legal legociable instrument without oondiaons, and jfliat a T^nesti.for,se9uri<y )f payment was sufficient consideration. Hjs Worship took somg ,tis»elto sonsiderhis verdict, and said he had some- to the conclusion; (thajt ,def endajftt not liable. Judgment was ac»rdingly. g^veix ..for acd The court then adjourned. : /: -— — __: a