RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT FOXTON.

Manawatu Herald, Volume II, Issue 65, 9 April 1880, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT FOXTON.

"Wednesday, Aprl 7, 1880. (Before B. Ward, Esq., 8.M., arid E. & Thynne, Esq., JJP.) A69AULT. " ' Hemara Turanga was charged by Tawa Hohaiti with assaulting him on the 30th March. The case arose oat of a dispute ■ regarding a oanoe. It appeared from the plaintiff's evidence that the canoe, which was owned by Mr Akera, had drifted some dietanoe, and Tawa having obtained pus* session of it determined to' take it back to the owner. Apparently with a view to the salvage, Hemara wished to go back with it, also, and as Tawa refused the offer, Hemara pulled him out of the canoe and*' ducked " ; him. Tawa, Arama Karaka, Ohas. Batt, 'and Meihana gave evidence in support of the charge. The defendant gave an opposite version of the affair, and said that Tawa desired to take the oanoe from him. In chasing him to get the oanoe back) he fell over a sleeper, and nearly broke hia leg. This made him angry, and he therefore "ducked" Tawa. The Bench considered there was blame on both sides, and -fined ' Hemara 5a and costs, 13s ; plaintiff to pay 'the expenses of his own witnesses. CIVIL CASES, Tawa Hohaia v. Hemara Turanga.— Claim £3 9s 2d. Nonsuited with contp, sa. T. Bull v. Watson and Green. — Claim £7 10s, for raut. Ordered to stand- over till next Court day. Loudon v. Chas. Brown. — Claim £7 10s 3d. Judgment by default for amount and costs. • • ;• . , A DBAINAGE CASE. Eonicles and Norton v. Bobt. Cobb.— Cjairo, £36 19s 6d, balance of account for draining, ditching, <fco. Mr Cobb produced aa agreement which

was not stamped, and therefore was ruled out of Court. . ■ John Ronioles deposed — I have been doing some fencing for Mr Oobb ; we were; to get 6a per ohain for wire fencing; the. work was done by us, and passed by Mr--Cobb; we were to do some ditching and banWnsr from peg to peg, at 16s per chain ; he passed it on the 16th of March, and has not since found fault j our agreement was that we were to build a fence between two ditched { it was to be three «• turfs?,! and 18 inohes of manuka ; Al r CobVs agreement was to lay the stuff on the line, and he neglected to do tbia ; my mate had to do it, ond we charge £1 for that. By Mr Cobb— l swear that the ditch and. bank fence were what I.haye_.Bai4;.3Lojal not read, and if the specifications are not what you said, you are to blame, not me ; the arrangement with Mr Hadfield was nothing to do with what I was to do for you ; you "were to^uTthe ■strbsTxe^fKfmTr we could get them with the horsed and' «r could you. I did not understand everything was to be taken out of y the ditch ; t£d prica was not lower than I had got from others ; I was not bound to take the logs out of the drain } I swear I have left a good watercourse in the drain. ' By the Court— The drain was to be 3ft wide at the top, 2ft at the bottom, and 2}ft deep ; I have left the drain so that the water can run ; I swear the work has been done according to agreement) after Mr Cobb said he was satisfied,' tie oomplained that the timber whs not cleared out ; there i Wu 'nothing in the agreement about when we were to bo paid, but of course when a man has done hid work, he want* hia money; Mr Oobb wanted us to do some work from the peg into the bush ; wo have been detained ever since waiting for . the opportunity to do this bit of drain. ' '■ - ;: Thomas Norton, the other plaintiff, gave evidence similar to that given by Rnnicles. Wultct Cobb, brother of defendant, dft* , posed — I am not interested in this matter pecuniarily ; I remember my brother telling me the. roots had to be taken out ; I have. , with my brother measured $be drain tola morning, which is 23 chains long. John Waldin, a drainer, deposed— l have seen 3y toons' drain and. notice the roots and logs were taken out, and laid on the sid&; in your drain the stumps are left ; there is • large stump in the drain ; I think it would take the two of them a day to remove >t^e timber. " ■' ; Robt. Cobb deposed— The agreement was made on the 28th of January ; the fence was to beputbplo prevent sheep dro»iing from Mr, Stewart's to my land ; I asked Roniclea whether he made the fence between Hadfield and Symon? ; I told him I wanted mine made like it ; he referred to the timber he had to take out of Hadfield's drain ; Konicles said he thought there would be a great deal of wood in ray drain, and said' ■he could not do the work for less than 16s per chain ; I agreed to sledge the stabs to the nearest point of the wnce ; the base for the bank was to be 6 feet wide ; the agreement was to cut the .drain to (he bash; which was about 26 chains ; RomcW left his work for a week, during which time he was working and drinking }n Portion ; when they were nearly finished, we found the line to the bush was not laid off j two days after this Mr Stewart was to come out and lay off the line ; I complained to them of the loots, and declined to settle up uotiL they, -were done ; Mr Stewart was unable to cofae up, %nd I promised to employ them in the meantime until Mr Stewart cum© up, at 7fl, per day ; the men did not cut the manuka, where it was agreed. By Norton— l did not. tell you ; -in Mr Whdficld's house you could cut the manuka 'where you liked ; when we agreed to do the work, " sheep-proof" was not mentioned. His Worship said the evidence of defendant was outweighed by the two witnesses. The agreement should have been stamped. He would albtfthfei&'l&i Yor tf lre JfonoingV and for the 23 chains of ditch and bank at 16s. The credit givemforif 11 Ss wauJi leave £10 lls 6d and costs, £1 14s, for whichi judgment wa* given. • '■■< •'. ! ! ■•> m• ■