Feilding R.H- Court

Feilding Star, Volume VII, Issue 54, 15 October 1885, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court

Wednesday, October 14, 1885. Before R. Ward, Esq., R.M., and E. H. Wright, Esq., J.P. CRIMINAL. J. Keen v Seeley. — No appearance of plaintiff or defendant. The case was therefore struck out. Police v Francis Cook for using obscene language in a public place on the 6th instant. Mr Staite said the offence had not been committed in a public place, and therefore did not come within the meaning of the Act. He would admit that the obscene language was used. Mr Sandilands appeared for the prosecution. He gave a brief account of the case. The affair took place in Mr Freeman's shop in Manchester street. F. Freeman deposed he was a shoemaker in Manchester street ; the language was used about three of four o'clock in the afternoon ; the door of the shop was open ; it is a retired place ; knew the accused. Cross-examined : The shop is not far from the Denbigh Hotel. Mr Staite addressed the court for the defence. He pleaded that the defendant was a married woman, upon whom a number of children were dependent, and a long term of imprisonment would be disastrous to the husband and family. The Bench said the language used by the prisoner was a disgrace to her sex, and sentenced her to 24 hours in the Feilding lock up. W. Arnott v Otto Bilderbeck, a boy, for damaging a fence. Mr Sandilands appeared for defendant. W. Arnott deposed : He knew defendant; saw him cutting down his fence with an axe ; the boy lives near him ; he cut across one rail of the four rail fence; the boy was after geese eggs; there were three boys ; the value of the rail and setting it in would be a day's work for a man ; estimated the damage at 8s ; told the boy he shouldn't do that; the boy said he would cut more ; it was 7.30 or 7.45 at night; it was sufficiently light to see the boy ; this is a brother of the boy he charged with stealing eggs before. Cross-examined : Saw him at a goose's nest on another man's property— the property of orphan children. Constable Meehan deposed : He had looked at the fence at request of plaintiff; saw one rail had been cut through and two rails cut partly through ; there was a lot of complaint about these boys. Mr Sandilands said, in defence, that the boy was not liable, as he was between the years 7 and 14. The defendant was examined by the Bench : He went to school, could read and write, and said his prayers ; boys who told ties went to hell. He was then sworn: Knew Mr Arnott ; did not remember turning his goose off her nest ; remembered last Wednesday week. A younger brother was examined : Arnott's fence was broken before the examination ; his brother hit it with a billhook, and it broke. The Bench dismissed the case, with counsel's fee of 21s. CIVIL CASES. Manchester Road Board v J. W. Jeffrey.— Claim £2 10s 11d. No appearance of defendant. C. Bray proved his right to represent the Baard as collector. Verdict for plaintiff with costs. Same v F. Moffke.— Claim 18s 10d. Verdict for plaintiff with costs. J. Bowater v P. Connor. — Claim £17 19s. No appearance of defendant. Mr Sandilands, who appeared for plaintiff, applied to add £1 10s to the amount; application refused. Plaintiff proved his claim for £17 19s. Verdict for plaintiff and costs with counsel's fee. G. Dear v P. Connor. — Claim £20 10s on a dishonored promissory note. Mr Staite appeared for plaintiff. Verdict for plaintiff and costs. A. Neilson v J. Jensen. — £2 12s. — Judgment confessed for £11 8s, and costs 22s. D. B. Lowers v Smith.— Claim £7 12s 10d on a judgment summons. No appearance of defendant. Case adjourned to next court day. White v Noffke.— Claim £15 12s. Plaintiff was sworn: Was engaged on a contract wire fencing ; the job is worth £105 ; had received most of the money, or had given an order for what was coming to him; had to receive about £15. Case adjourned for a month, defendant to find the money in the mean time. R. Morphy v Wheeler.— Claim £15. — Mr Staite for plaintiff, and Mr Esam for defendant. This was an action to recover damages £10 and £5, for the defendant holding illegal permission of a horse. R. Morphy deposed that he was a livery stable keeper in Feilding ; knew the horse the subject of the action; in July, 1880, the horse was missed, with another one ; it was at livery on behalf of Mr Sircomb, when he missed it ; saw a man named Neary

riding it at Awahuri a fortnight ago ; claimed it and took possession of it without any trouble ; the horse was now worth about £2 ; the horse had been badly knocked about ; estimated the loss of livery at £5 ; had a conversation with defendant on the subject who denied having the horse. John Neary deposed : He was a laborer at Awahuri ; knew the horse in dispute (witness described the marks); had seen the defendant riding the horse at the latter end of April ; had tried to buy it ; defendant said the horse was not his, but as it had been there five years witness could have it, for his (defendant's) part, but if any one claimed the horse he was to have it ; the horse was now shod ; it is not worth much — say 30s or 40s ; Morphy saw him with the horse and he at once gave it up. J. Elliott deposed : Was working at a sawmill ; knew the horse ; brought him from the Hutt six years ago ; he was then worth £10 or £12. George Wheeler deposed : Was the defendant in this action ; knew the horse ; remembered Neary asking him to sell the horse; said he could not sell him as the horse was not his ; his father had a German boy who had probably ridden the horse ; did not ask Neary to say he had not seen witness riding the horse ; had some conversation with Neary; did not ask Neary if he was the only witness Morphy had. Mr Esam contended that the horse was not the property of Mr Morphy, and Mr Staite replied. The Bench non-suited the plaintiff with costs. The court then adjourned.