MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume V, Issue 564, 8 April 1876, Page 3

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CH HIST CHURCH. Saturday, April S. [Before G. L. Hellish, Esq., 11. M., and Caleb Whitefoord, Esq, 11.M.] Drunkenness. —James Schrader, for being drunk and disorderly, was fined 10s. Rescuing a Horse. —George Gallop was charged with unlawfully rescuing a horse, which had been seized by Mr Me Knight the head bailiff of the Court, under a distress warrant. Robert McKnight deposed to seizing six horses under a distress warrant. They were taken to Tattersall’s, and remained there until Wednesday night. About a quarter to ten on Thursday night the prisoner went to him and told him that the brown hack had been taken away. Robert Campbell, one of the proprietors of Tattersail’s, deposed that prisoner was in his employ, and was in charge of the yards on the evening in question. Major Cunningham deposedio seeing a dark coloured hack driven out of the yard on the 30th of March. The horse was a dark brown one, with a cropped tail, and lame in the fore leg. Could not say that it was the prisoner who had had driven out the horse, but had seen him in the yard previously, and the bailiff was in the office. John Lewis, deposed, being in charge of the horses at Tattersall’s. Saw the prisoner in the yard. Witness went into the office to light a bit of fire, the prisoner and another ostler being in the yard. Subsequently the prisoner informed him of the loss of the horse. By the prisoner—l believe you took the horse. You could be easily bought. Two glasses of beer would buy you over. Prisoner —If I had you outside I might talk to you about that too. Mr Hellish —Do not use any threatening language here, sir, or I will bind you over to keep the peace. You ought to be ashamed of yourself to speak like that to a man old enough to be your grandfather. Prisoner—Well he should not insult me then. To witness—Did you not tell me to inform Mr McKnight that you had been round and seen the horses in order to keep you out of a row. Witness —No, certainly not; but you were away courting afterwards. Chaa Burke gave corroborative evidence. Prisoner said he knew nothing about the missing horse beyond that immediately it was missed he went and informed the bailiff. He had been in Mr Campbell’s employ for some time, and this was the first time that anything had been brought against him. The Bench was of opinion that there was not sufficient evidence to convict, and dismissed the case. Civil Cases. —Ford and Co v Maude ; claim thirteen guineas, for valuation ; Mr Harper for plaintiff, Mr Duncan for defendant. The plaintiff deposed—l am a commission agent in Christchurch ; I claim £l3 13s ; Mr Maude came to me in 1873 with a letter which he had received from Mr Albert Gray, asking me if I would act as joint valuator between the Government and Mr Gray on the basis of this letter. The first condition was that the expense of valuation should be borne by the Government and Mr Albert Gray jointly. I could not go just then ; but subsequently I went with Mr Maude about May of 1874. We drove up in a buggy which I hired at Mr Maude’s request. We went to Mr Gray’s farm, and the next day I made notes in my pocket book, and some two months afterwards I handed in Mr Maude my valuation, which was not accepted. I was subsequently summoned by Mr Gray as a witness in the Railway Land Compensation Court. Mr Mann refused to accept the valuation on behalf of the Government. The result in the instance I have referred to was in favour of the Government, I considered Mr Gray had been so shamefully treated that I refused to accept anything from him. That case had nothing at all to do with the present proceedings. I would not have gone with Mr Maude to value this property if it had not been on the understanding that the Government was to pay half my expenses. Mr Maude told me he could nob pay anything on behalf of the Government, and added that he was going to ask me to pay | for the buggy hire. It was, however, after- • wards paid for by Mr Maude. By Mr Duncan—Mr Maude might have shown me a letter he wrote to Mr Gray. I never received a letter from Mr Gray on this subject. A letter was put in to witness’s hand in his own hand-writing, in which he stated that he had received a letter from Mr Gray. A letter was read from Mr Maude, in which it was stated that if no agreement could be come to in the matter of the valuation, it must go to arbitration, as provided for under the Public Works Act. Witness continued | —There was never any question as to my | being paid by the Government and Mr Gray. Mr Gray had told me that, if the valuation was not accepted by the Government, he would accept me as his valuator. 1 made a verbal claim for this some time ago, but only sent in my claim after the assessment. I did not consider that that made any difference to me. By Mr Harper—l don’t remember that Mr Maude ever told me that I was to be paid by Mr Gray. Ido not believe that Mr Maude understood that the cost would only be paid by the Government in the event of accepting the valuation. Thomas William Maude deposed—l had communication with Mr Gray in reference to the valuation of his land. I sent Mr Gray a letter, and ia reply received another one in which he Mr Gray stated that he had written to Mr Maude asking how to act for him. I have no power to refer this matter to a referee. I pointed this out to Mr Ford. I never left him to believe that he was retained by the Crown, and that the Crown was to pay h ; m anything. I altogether discountenanced the idea. I paid for the buggy, but not in consequence of any feeling of indebtedness to Mr Ford. I had no authority to pay coramissons, and had I paid him I should have had to pay out of my own pocket. I distinctly deny having ever engaged Mr Ford as a mutual referee. At this stage Mr Harper said that no doubt a misunderstanding bad arisen, and that it was no use going on with the case. Judgment for defendant with costs, plaintiff stating that he would take care that no such thing occurred again so far as he was concerned.