Feilding S.M. Court.

Feilding Star, Volume XVII, Issue 60, 7 September 1895, Page 2

Feilding S.M. Court.

Frieay, September 6th, 1894. [Before Mr R. L. Stanford, S.M.I W. Dickson v. W. Stackwood ; claWi £5 lls. Mr Sandilands for j 1.-iiuMfT. Judgment for amount claimed v. ith cos'.k Bs, solicitor's fee 15s 6d. W. W. Corpe v. Peter 8.-nric : claim £11. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff, said the whole of the amount had been paid excepting 9s 9d disputed by defendant, who alleged he had paid this amount and asked to have his evidence taken at Waipukurau. Adjourned to September 20th. L. H. Goldfinch vJ. Traynor ; claim 15s. Mr Reade for plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff with costs .Os. Gco. Flygcr \\ T. Surman. Mr Prior, for plaintiff, claimed for costs, defendant having paid the amount of claim (i' 2) less costs. Judgment for 10s costs. Young and Colliugwood v F Beechcy ; a judgment summons claim L 9 17s 9d. Mr Reade instructed by Mr Scott Smith, of Manaia, appeared for plaintiffs. Defendant, being sworn, deposed he had no meaus, and offered to pay a pound down and pay 10s per mouth. An order was made accordingly. Stevens and Gorton v. Tapita Matina. This was au application for the rehearing of the case, judgment having been given for £10 as 4d, and au order made for payment, or in default imprisonment. Mr Rcade, instructed by Mr Innes, appeared in support of the application. Mr Sandilands opposed the application ou points of law, and a discussion arose between him and His Worship as to whether Maori custom constituted legality in the matter of marriage law. Mr Saudilands contended that defendant was not legally the wife of the man with whom she lived, but merely according to Maori custom. His Worship thought that was sufficient for defendant to derive the benefit of the Act, which prohibited a married woman from being imprisoned for debt. Also, it was a fatal objection that no conduct mouey had becu tendered when tho judgment summons was served. A warrant could not be executed when an order was bad. On the suggestion of Mr Saudilauds, His Worship agreed to adjourn the case to satisfy himself whether the marriage custom of the Maoris was equivalent to a legal marraige. E. Feck v. R. Parr ; claim £2. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff, and Mr Rcadc for plaiutifl, who disputed having received the goods sued for. Plaintiff produced his books in support of the claim, and E. Haybittle gave evidence for plaintiff. Mr Reade raised the objection that defendant was an undischarged bankrupt. Defendant, on being sworn, made a general denial of the claim. Constable Tuohy was called by Mr Reade and examined as to whether he had ever seen defendant smoking a pipe His Worship had no doubt the goods wore supplied. Judgment was given foi plaintiff for amount claimed, with costs os, solicitor's fee 20s. The Court then adjourned.