TE KUITI S.M. COURT.

King Country Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 492, 17 August 1912, Page 5

TE KUITI S.M. COURT.

THURSDAY, 15th AUGUST. Before Mr F. O'B. Loughnan, S.M. Judgment was given for plaintiff by default in the following cases: — Nicholls, v. Tuara Titi, £24 Is 4d, costs 23s ; Mabbett v. Needham, £6 6s, cost 23s ; Green and Golebrook v. iNeedham, £4 2a 6d, costs 10s; Hattaway v. McGarvey. £6 5g 6d, costs £2 7s Gd: same v. Needham, £9 15s 6d, custs 23s 6d; aama v. Goburn, £5 16s 7d. costs £2 7s'6d; Brathwaite v. Gardner and £5 18s 4d, costs 26s 6d; Asplin v. Coburn £lO 4s 3d, coats £2 23 6d; Dudley v. Clapham £3 13s 3d, costs 10s: Hollowav v. Rota, £4 3s 7d, costs £2 2s; Nicholls v. Milsh, £l2 4s lOd, costs 30s 6d.

Judgment Summonses —Green and Colebrook v. Rou Rata: Mr Robinson appeared fur plaintiffs and asked for an order; immediate payment was bordered or in default seven days imprisonment. Blackman and Cobb v. Hapua: Mr Robinson for plaintiff; order made for immediate payment or in default seven days imprisonment. Insobriety. Whare Bell en a charge of drunkenness, was fined 10s and costs.

Defence Defaulters. William Stewart for failing to attend parades as specified, under the Defence Act; defendant failed to appear and was finde £2 and costs. A. Lawrence, on a similar charge was similarly dealt with.

Charles Leuin, who was represented by Mr Finlay, was charged with having got drunk, obstructed a railway official and used insulting language. After hearing the evidence of Messrs White, stationmaster, W. F. Hornibrook, railway clerk, Constable Capp and H. Jane, his Worship convicted and fined accused 10s and 17s costs for obstruction, and 40s and 13s costs for insulting language. A MISSING WATCH.

Mclntyre v. Chilcott.—Claim £ll for a watch left.with defendant for repair. Mr Sharpies appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Finlay for the defence.

The plaintiff in evidence said he left the watch with defendant on October 24th, 1910. The watch belonged to his father and it had a special value in consequence. When witness returned some time latter, and asked for the watch defendant denied having it, but lent witness a watch to keep him going while defendant endeavoured to find what had become of the watch.

To Mr Finlay: Witness had no doubt it was Chilcott he left the watch with. Had not asked Fenton for his ,watch. He had not told defendant that ■Jie had got thewatch about twenty years before from an old sea captain. Had never given authority to anyone to apply to Mr Fenton for the watch Mary Mclntyre, sister of plaintiff, corroborated plaintiff's evidence as to leaving the watch with Mr Chilcott for repair. Witness called four or five months later for the watch. Mr Chilcott, after looking into a case among other watches, 3aid he had no watch belonging to her brother. Witness called frequently afterwards. For the defence Mr Finlay saia he was instructed by his client that he had never had the watch for repair. Defendant, in evidence, denied having received the watch for repair. To Mr Sharpies: Defendant admitted having offered a watch to plaintiff, as he did not want to waste time coming to court over the matter. The watch he considered would be valued at ten or twelve shillings. The watch he offered to plaintiff was worth £4 or £5, selling value.

Judgment was given for plaintiff, his Honour holding that the evidence showed that the watch had been delivered to defendant. The value was assessed at £3 10s and costs £6 Ss 6d.