Feilding R.M. Court

Feilding Star, Volume VII, Issue 143, 13 May 1886, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court

Wednesday, 12th May, 1886. (Before E. Ward,. Esq., E.M.) W. G. Haybittle v Thos. Archer.— Claim £8 '9a 7d. Judgment for plaintiff and costs^ • ; %. >* - t E. J. Cottrell v ; Pinsent.— olaii| £8 18s. Mr Staite for plaintiff" and and Mr Sandilauds for defendant, who t sKStf aw^i^jßaPßawta -3S8»» v*wws» swim* iiewfitar-*- w ■Yi<mr£!cti read out a cumber of the disputed items in the account. • ,-„ y fy / E. J. Cottrell deposed that the sum claimed was due; ; vhe allowed; ceffiSuT items disputed amounting io'-^l^-ftr lid to be struck off to save the tim» of. the court ; } he . also admitted , t|uit Mrs Cottrell had received- £2 for" which credit had not been given in tho account. £. Pickersgillj accountant, identified an agreement which he had drawn up he deposed that defendant had been satisfied with the contents j ' "did." 1 not think any money passed at the time. - George Wilson* deposed that.hewas;; an assistant to Mr Cottrell;, Mrs and Mr Pinsent hail nover disputed owing* the money, but had asked timd to pay^ by instalments ; never heard a dispute as to j>aymenti of £6. : J '• ■ For the defence Mr Pinsent deposed that be was a resident at Makino;: had bought a horse from plaintiff .for; £6 10s in 1883; had the horse over seven mouth's; returned the horse? about the time he got the receipt. Mrs Piusent gave evidence as tocertain payments j paid Mr CottifeU. £6 in actual cash, it had nothing 4 to do with the horse transaction;; nth© money was paid in notes, a £5 #n4va{ £1 note . -*"'" Council on both sides having? addressed the bench,. . „ ■ The B.M. said the £6 had evidently been paid, Mr Cottrell having, made a mistake. . Judgment for defendant aud costs., Counsel's fee allowed for first adjournment. „ . •..'."" ... G-. Clarke y McDermott.— Claim £10. Mr Vandilands for plaintiff, and Mr Staite for defendant. "" ''' ;:! J " This was a claim for hire, of a wagon and damages done to the same. G. Clarke deposed that he was son of the plaintiff * - the wagon ■' was toi bo let at 6s a week and to be 'returned in. good order ; defendant had, s it- over & fortnight; when returned wheel and shaft were broken and the pole split. ; (Letters were^'pui'^ Showing' that notices of a claim' for dWiikiges had been sent) ; it would cost £3 5s to put the wagon in' repair; it had not been used; Since it was returned- 1 Grosa examined : The iwagoii lia rth» property of witness. - ; • :*;. ; * k Mr Staite 2 blaiintedi a nonsuit oiKthis. MrSandilfcnda replied and quoted cases; ' ; '<i .- -: ■. t „«:.-•( *,:. <;*| A nonsuit was entered, mth counsel's |cc 2ls. EL Worsfold>t r J^ose;.^aaim £& 1 Qs> for a lioi'do alleged to fiave been, sold to defeudaufcfi Mr!SutLdiluudi for plaintiff, aud Mr Staite for defenant. : ■": \" •'■ .' / '"V;.' 1 " 1 ". "" Plaintiff deposed that he sold defeudant a hur.se in Alarcli for the amount claimed. '«•"..".'"' ; '' . ' G. Worsf old, assistant storeinau to. Mr Haybittle, deposed as to the purchase of the horse h^i defendant; had seen him riding the horse. ["■,;'- v , ■;-'.'' J. Hose, def en.daut,, deposed that the previous witnesses had noi told the truth ; he had not consented to purchase, but had agreed 'to keep the norse for- the paddock^ing and shoeiug ; the horse hW not' been shocljjiiad! used' it five days to go to work ab Corpe's mill, Makiuo. . Mr fcitaite claimed j a nonsuit on the. ground that, the horse was sold on Sunday. * ; V Mr Sandilands replied and quoted cases. ' . J >; • A nonsuit was entered, no: order being made for costs. :;: t :i ''■' Prior & Sandilands y H. Holland. —Claim £5 14s /for" prof essionaif Wi vices. Mr Prior for plaintiffs; '- and Mr Staite for defendant? — Mr Sandilanids'gatve evidence as to : the particulars of the.olaim. Mr J. A'Caurt deposied f Hat he was clerk to Prior and bandilancU; maxle certain entries in the day book to the debit of Mr Holland ; was present when Gamman and Holland signed a certain document ; Mr Sandilands., asked who was going to pay for the work ; Holland said Gamman would pay for it ; if hot, he (Holland) would see it paid ; Hollaud, on another occasion, said he would pay the account if £1 was knocked off. ' " ! ; H. Holland, being duly stoorn, deposed that he was a retired gentleman ; remembered 'the bailnient ; J Mr* : Gamman was to pay the* costs*; thia : arrangement was made in Mr Sandilands private house ; a bill of ooeta waa handed ! to Mr Garnihan; a claim was made: ©^defendant for the amount about a "month agfo ; at the present time Gamman^is heav-i ily indebted to witness, and!*lmany others in Palmerstoh; had nbt.he^d ! Mr Sandilands say he would look bill; ' to witness for ' payment ; had offered' to pay the account by a P.N. if £1 wait deducted. K ; ' > . .. Mr Sandilands, . recalled,- deposit thajt he took instructions t from MiJ Holland ; had no instructions from Mr Gamman before the bailment was completed. . \ '"'\\ (The Court here adjourEf^ $6*" lunch)- ■"'.'' ' ' ' On resuming, Mr Staite addressed: the Court, and Mr Prior replied. * f Verdict for plaintiff and' cost® T3& 7 A. Bpeta y Cameron.-^dtaim £5 % ; lid. Mr Staite for plaintiff, and'Ml^ Sandilands for defendant ' ihis wasV a claim for grazing 130 aheep.' :' ;f J Harry Hughes deposed 'that he knew the plaintiff, who lives with witness as his wife; saw the sh&ep running on the land ; Ida sheep week is the usual chai'ge ; ■ had given, Cameron an account for the money bn|" behalf of Hoeta; Cameron' refused to^ pay. rr<* H. Cameron deposed that he did not owe the sum claimed ; Jack Perry nad^ come to him for money j 'had rdoaiveU--

l&n account, which he had handed to \Mt Sandilands; had paid Hoeta up Hto the 16th February. I Hoeta deposed (Mr Ward acted as I interpreter) that she had received £2 -from Cameron ; did not remember the month; it was paid for the grazing of 4t Drevieus mob; did not know how ■many weeks the 130 sheep had been xunning; herfatherreceives ldperhead per week for grazing sheep ; had asked Cameron for £3 in February ; he said :it was too much; Cameron then said he would give £2, which was to be a ■present for herself and her old man Harry Hughes ; she then got the £2 ; this was before Christmas; £5 was paid some months previous to that. For the defence, Mr Sandilands aaid all charges had. been paid by *Cameron. . H. Cameron deposed that he had sheep gracing at sheep grazing at Hoeta'« for about three months ; had paid paid Hoeta £2 in settlement in -February; had not been asked for •noney until he sued Hughes. Judgment for eight weeks, £4 6s «d with costs. The costs of two witnesses summoned by defendant to be paid by plaintiff. Counsels fee 21s. C. E. Thome v Wagstaff.— Claim .£ls. Mr Prior for plaintiff , and Mr Staito for defendant. The plaintiff claimed £20 in payonent of certain instruction in cheesevnaking; had received £5 by a post •office order, some time in February 1885 ; acknowledged receipt of this 3n the month of April ; on the same «day wrote a letter; should any one «ay this walalso tf receipt for the £15 would tell " a fabulous lie" ; in June, 1885, went to Woodville to see Wug*taff, who pivmited so pay as quick as he possibly could; the letter sent accompanying the receipt contained witnesses apology for not sending the acknowledgement for £5 sooner ; had no quarrel with Wagstaff; had no animus aginst him; not only taught Wagstaff his business but got him his billet. ! Judgment for plaintiff with costs, j The court then adjourned. j