Feilding R.M. Court

Feilding Star, Volume XIII, Issue 96, 11 February 1892, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court

Wednesday, February 10. (Before Mr Brabant, 8.M.) S. J. Thompson y Thos. Fraser ; claim, £1 15s 3d. Mr Pnor for plaintiff, who deposed to having supplied good? for the amount. Judgment by default with costs 10s. J. E. Simpson vS. 0. Bodgers ; claim, £17 Ids 9d. Plaintiff deposed to supplying goods to defendant for the amount claimed. Judgment by default with costs £2 10s. J. Patterson v Geo. Richards; claim, £7 10s. Judgment by confession -with costs 15s. .. J. C. Morey & Co. v. 8.. Drury;. claim, £7 15s 4d. Mr Prior appeared for the defendant. Plaintiff deposed to goods being sold and delivered; saw defendant yesterday who wanted a month to pay the amount. Judgment for plaintiff with cost 10s. G. Holland v. Thos Gordon ; claim, £3 2s 6d, judgment summons. Mr San3llands applied for an order to be made for payment in seven days. It was stated that defendant was away when the sum* mons was issued. An order was made for a re-issue of the summons without further costs. ,-.,.> Martha Hastie v B. S. Fowler; claim £29 10s Bd. Mr Sandilands, for plaintiff, stated that the sum of £2 10s had been paid since the summons was issued, and could not account for the absence of defendant. The Court ordered that pay. ment be made within seven days, less the amount paid (£2 10s), or in default 28 days in Wanganui gaol. J. B. Pybns t J. Thomas, J. Dpgherty, and A. Gurney ; claim £4 17s CkM Mr Richmond for plaintiff. '. J Mr Pybus, storekeeper, Halcombe, deposed to supplying goods to the: amount claimed. .'.. • . , Judgment by default, with costs IBs. , H. "W. Bunn v. Herbert Thbinas; claim £70. . Mr Sandilands for plaintiff, an j Mr £aber for defendant. Mr Sandilands stated this was an action for damages caused by a bush.fireinlshe Spur road. The damages were estimated as follows :— SO bags.grass seed atSJOs^per bag, 50 sleepers at 2s each, 100-posts £2 10s, 5 chains fencing at 15s per chain, and a quantity of grass for pasture r £9 55. . H. W. Bunn, farmer, deposed to haying 50 acres of standing bush, and a portion of his land was closed up for.the purpose of procuring grass seed; his grass seed was stookedready for thrashing, and he^estimated it would produce 3J bags; 'per acre, and would be worth £1 per bag ; had attempted to Bave the seed, but. Ibree sacks was all he had left; Mr and Mrs Thomas told him the following morning that the fire commenced on his (Bunn's) and Clarke's side, he also said hejhad not lit the fire, and did not want toburnfpr a month after that time; with three days' notice could have saved his property.'' Cross-examined : Had not spoken to any of the witnesses before coming into Court; did not know what they, had got to say ; could not say whether Jacobs? 6r Thomas' bush was burned first; had waited a fortnight before consulting a solicitor. , : {. ; : .*: ." Donald Clarke, the owner of a section adjoining Messrs Bunn and Yolkert, had bush felled on his Bectipn this, season.; went down to Thomas on seeing the fire, who said he had a good. fire bjijt it was difficult to start ; his father asked Thomas, " What about Bonn's grass seed ?" Thomas replied he knew nothing about it. Cross-examined : Did not think Thomas was a man who would intentionally injure anyone ; did not mind hisTSush being burned, and had no complaints to make. Angus Clarke, father of the previous witness also gave evidence. - : ' ; ."? Henry Jacobs, farmer, deposed to having ten acres of bush to burn ; had asked Thomas to give him notice before Jburning, which he promised to do. i • v^, W. Anderson and Nills Larreon gave evidence in respect to the damage to the property and the direction in which the fire came from. Mr Baker, for the defence, called Herbert Thomas, who deposed: He was a farmer on the Penelope road; he swore he did not light the fire nor cause to be lighted the fire which spread on to the other peoples' property ; could ; not say who started it ; he and Mrs Thomas were having dinner when they heard a sound of fire, and discovered the bush burning; had been sawing stabs the same morning in order to fence a paddock in winch .toS confine a bull ; when he went) out of the house a large part of the bush was burned ; would not burn without giving notice ; would swear that on that day nor the day before had he lighted any fire; had received another letter claiming £56 compensation in regard to the same fire ; he had never said he would never pay for the fencing but not for the grass seed ; had seen cattle and sheep running on the plaintiff's land ; 3J sacks of grass seed was an unusual amount to procure from an acre ; it is a usual thing for busjfto' catch $re without knowing the ca,i|Be; * Cross-examined: Some bush 'should be felled ax months to m&keV a good burn; considered his was not dry enough ; went to Jacobs : and Clarke to suggest burning, because ho thought it might take fire by accident ; after the bush was burned he met young Clarke at the boundary of the three sections ; had not, as stated, being striking matches and lighting fires ; . the Penelope road is not formed and had not seen anyone using the road or lighting fires during the past month ; both he and his wife asked Mr Bunn if he had lighted their bush; could not say whether the fire started m Jacobs bush or notjjbad the sheets up round the house to k ? eepou£ the wind and smoke, although during the wmterthej had not been up. By Mr Baker: When he oameoutof the house Jacobs bush was burned ;'^ut' could not say wliere ths fire commenced ; when speaking to Mr .Clarke. fcad no idjs of the origin of the firs. ...*■<• '-'■•-. 5 . Mrs Annie Thomas, wife pf thy defend: ant, deposed: First discovered. the ! fire whilst at dinner ; her husband was smoking ; he had been preparing fencing material all the morning ; was certain-he had. not been away from home ; - when she saw the fire there seemed to be a light all round ; the greatest fire appeared to be in the midst of thenf bush near to Clarke's j? Mr Bunn asked her \f they were gqing tcj set all the cpuntry alight, ancji she asJiefT Mr Bunn jf he ha| ftartpd. tb? fife. Cross-examined : Was present at . ijig interview between Mr P. Clarke and hep husband at then* whare ; he had seen the fire at diuner time ; Mr Jacob's Mr Clarke's and. their own bush was burning at the tune. ' Mr C. Volkerfc deposed to being a neighbour of the defendants ; ,for two or three days before had seen smoke issuing from bush around Thomas' place, had seen Mr Thomas sometime before btit said he did not intend to burn till the' middle of February; he and Mr Woodman had been to Mr Bunn's place and estimated the damage at £18 or £20 ; the grass destroyed at the time has now grown* up and is better than ever; a fair price for the sleepers on the land would be la each ; condemned sleepers used for posts would be worth 30s per 100. ' Cross-examined : Could see all over the paddock and would know if any logs were burning; reckoned about 4 or 5 endins or fStiTO^wei* burned, ' J -.> In reply to His Worship! Had no idea how the fire originated. ■ '• " } -'■ •■ :? ->■ > Mr Robert Woodman, farmer, went with last witness to estimate damage done on plaintiffs land ; considered thY pasture had not suffered any damage ; 1£ bags of cocksfoot would be a fair quant.- \ ity off 'an acre of land. * ."•. " ' This was the* case' fbr i&e'defendant. Counsel on both eidea having! spoken

his Worship Yes&rvea 1 6i* Judgment. Richard .Jenkins v. Charles Burgess; claim, £5 19s. Adjourned till next Court day. Martin Bielski and his wife v. D. Ritzman; claim, £100. This was a case of assault by D. Ritzman upon Mrs F. Bielski. Messrs Prior and Hankins for the plaintiffs and Mr Sandilands for the defendant; Mrs Mary Bielski, one of the plaintiffs, deposed: Resided beyond Pemberton ; her husband had a section there ; I>. Ritzman lived near their place ; on the 18th October laßt she was inside their own section ; defendant had been "sooling" the cows, and on being. remonstrated with he said he would Bmasb. witness' brain ; he then hit witness with a bis long pole, holding it with booth hands ; remembered nothing more after being helped into the house, where she fainted, until the doctor was attending her ; was eight days in bed and conld do no work for a fortnight ; could not hear for four weeks after and the effects are felt to the present time. Cross-examined : Did not swear at defendant nor call him names ; was not in the habit of quarrelling with her neighbors. Dr P. J. Mussen deposed to being a certified medical practitioner practising in the Birmingham district ; about the 18th of October was called to attend Mrs Bielski and found her suffering from what appeared to be the effects of bruises ; she was conscious; charged a fee of five guineas for the visit ; gave a written description of her injuries ; was certain she was suffering from pain. Fanny Bielski, daughter of the plaintiffs, deposed to being 15 years old last birthday ; knew Mr Ritzman ; remembered the 18th October and the particulars of the assault ; after knocking her mother down defendant threatened to knock her down too ; on previous occasions the defendant had threatened to shoot her and her sister. Cross-examined : There were no dogs after the cows. Martin Bielski deposed : He was felling bush for Mr Pemberton three miles from his home ; was called home to see his wife, who was very-ill in bed ; during the night she was delirious ; sat up with her all night, and was obliged to stay at home three days with her. Cross-examined : His wife had a good temper ; never received a letter of complaint from anyone ; had no dispute with defendant. . .~ >» Frank Bielski, son of plaintiffs, 9 years old, also gave evidence. Samuel McSweeney corroborated the evidence of the previous witnesses. Lilly Bielski, 8 years old, was called, but was not asked to give eyidence. This was the case for the plaintiffs. Mr Sandilands opened the case for the defendants. Daniel Ritzman deposed to being a farmer residing at Pemberton ; knew the Bielski'p, and said on the day in question he received great provocation from the female plaintiff, who used very bad language to him and invited him several times to strike her, and then asked the reason why he would not give her a clout; at her own request he did give her a blow with the "thin end of a pole, about the thickness of a finger. Cross-examined : It was a wine-berry stick ; his dogs were not worrying plaintiff's sheep ; his pup did play with the lambs ; had to bit her over the fence, which was a low one. By His Worship : His wife and Mrs Franchauser witnessed these proceedings ; he must have been a little excited at the time. . Mr Sandilands here rose to a point of order. Mrs Amelia Francbauser deposed to hying at Pemberton ; saw the occurrences described by the previous witness ; heard Mrs Bielski use disgraceful language. Cross-examined : Mrs Bielski lay down on her own accord ; passed near to her ; did not go to her asssistance because the blow was not seyere ; after fetching the cows passed Bielski's shortly after and saw Mrs Bielski still lying there. By His Worship: The blow might have knocked Mrs Bielski against the fence ; her children had come out of the house and insulted her on several occasions. Mrs Augusta Ritzman emphasized the evidence of the previous witness. Mr Sandilands having spoken for the defence, Mr Prior replied. His Worship thought the case ought to j have been brought up in the Criminal Court. The evidence of plaintiffs' witnesses did not agree, and he thought the case would be met by awarding damages £8 and costs £4 ss. CRIMINAL CASK. Two men, both named Joseph Lnkuschowski, were charged with fighting in a public place at Halcombe on the Bth inst. James Purkiss deposed to seeing the two accused fighting. Constable Tuohey gave the men, who are cousins, a good character. They were each fined 20s and costs of witnesses fee. . His Worship said that should the same thing occur again they would be more heavily fined, and be required to give security for the peace.