Feilding R.M. Court

Feilding Star, Volume XIV, Issue 141, 18 May 1893, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court

This Dav. (Before Mr. Brabant, R.M.) Henderson & Bridge v. M. Drury — clniin £13 12s. Mr Prior, for the plain, tiffs, stated that the defendant had paid the amount of the debt, and applied to the court for payment of the costs, 245. His Worship gave judgment for the sum ot 245, cost 9 incurred, with solicitor's fee, 11 Is. C. Bull v. Tapita Whata— claim £06 11s sd. Mr Sandilands for the plaintiff. Judgment was given for the amount claimed, with £2 4s costs of court, and solicitor's fee, £3 3s. Morey & Co. v. W. G. Boycl — claim £12 4s lid. Mr Sandilands for the plaintiff. Judgment was given for the amount claimed, with 30s cost of court, and £1 Is solicitor's fee. Henry Asud f W. C. Boyd : clnim £2 7s 4d. Mr Sandilands for the plaintiff Judgment was ciyrn for the amount claimed, with 16* eo*ts of court. H- F Jnnnings v H. Etaveneaux. In this case, his Worship, who had issued an order against ih»? defendant unlera judgment summons, granted a postponement of I lie proceedings until this date, in order to allow the defenbant time to prove lii< inability to pay. Mr Richj rnond for the plaintiff, and Mr Rcado for the defendant. The defendant was examined by Mr Richmond as to his inability to pay. William Heald for the plaintiff' deposed that defendant had been in hi* employ at 9< per day, since the end of November hist, and he had averaged five dajs work a week. After counsel for both parties had ad» dressed the court, his Worship said that sufficient evidence had not been submitted to warrant the commital of the de« fend tint to gaol. The order wouM be re* (used. (ieo Anyon y Charles Cornohus; claim £4 4s 7d. Mr Saudilands for the plaintiff. Judgment wus pi von for the amouut claimed, with 22s cost of court. Maria Oliver v John Donnelly ; claim I*7 2s 6d, on a judgment summons. Mr Snndilands for tho plaintiff. This case was adjourned till next court to give the defendant's brother James Donnelly time to answer his subpoena as a witness hi the case. Ills' Worship pointed out to defendant that his brother was liable to a fine of £10 for non attondanco. William J. Baker v Arthur Irvine; claim £13 9a 7d. M r Reado for the plaintiff. Mr Sundilauds for the defendant. W. J. Baker deposed, ns the result of an interview between tho defendant und himself, Wellsman was enjjagod to train the mnro Cruiskeon at 30s a week ; the mare was engaged in two races at Marton ; Kingan being engaged to ride her at £3 in the Hurdles, and 30s for the other raco. Cross-examined : Witness was quite positive as to the forma on which tho animal was to bo trained ; had never expressed any intention to any third parties that ho meant to have the defendant ; the only in forest witness had in the matter was what he couM make out of the machine ; tho mare was entered for two events at Otaki in witness' name , there was nothing unusual in tho trainer of a horse nominating it in his own name : witness was quite aware in the event of the mare winning at Otaki, a protest would be sustainod, if made. Re-examined : If the mare won at Otaki. the money would be handed over to Irvine ; the case would neyer have come into court if the mare had won her engagements at Marton. Fred Wellsman deposed as to the arrangement made for training the mare ; at present he had not received any training fees ; had nevor heard any conversation to the effect that Baker mas " having " Irvine. Cross examined : Witness thought Baker was to have the mare on other terms after Martou races ; Irvmo was to give them a " cut in " if the mare won. Re-examined: Witness considered that he had had the worst of the arrangements and Iryine the best, as he had got the horse. Mr Sandilands submitted that as the contract was made on a Sunday, plaintiff was not entitled to recover. His Worship reserved the point for consideration. Counsel then continued his address. [Left sitting.*;