Magistrate's Court, Foxton.

Manawatu Herald, 19 January 1895, Page 2

Magistrate's Court, Foxton.

(Before H..W. Brabant, Esq.,. S.M.)

Thursday, 17th January.

JUDGMENT SUMMONS.

Andrew Jonson v. John jßmifchu— - Claim £6 17s. On application of plaintiff the case was adjourned to next Court. • ;.

P. Hennessy, & Co. v. Kahoriki. — Claim £15 16a414« * !£hp dj&ftdani was examined upo^oath.-ftSai oepoißcr he had no property or stock. Order made that the amount be paid*&t the .. -_; rate of 80s a month. .-.•. .

Edoiund Osborne v.. Kahoriki.— £3 19s. In .this case it was shown in examiaatibn of '< cUfen<3#nt WaUfhf itad received iihe '" Amount" croer^io rent, but had paid it .away Jo some one else. - - . - . .

Order made that the amount be paid at the rate of 10s ~ a month or in default 7 day§ imprispnmeat io,, v « Wanganui gaol. * — k* .**

E. Osborne v. Benata Hekenui. — Claim £\\M 6d. The creditor declined to acce|)fc prbposakofcteb^fcuJ * make ov&-*ei ''l&ad, ?\fith»u> *|he A lessee's guarantee. ' v .'tii No order was made~r •«*.>« ;*;»$:; & M. J. McCarthy v. J«hnjSi»»i»r»r«i»' Claim £8 18s Bd. Mr Innes appeared for judgmentr-creditor. An adjournment was granted till next month. * - v ".If T

;^.r ... ... B. Spelman v. J> Mofowriuf-i M Claim £10. Mr Ray appeaj&djfgiu,plaintiff. : -, ■ „; : .. t#s „;-„ v Defendant admitted £7 but objected to the charge of ißß"fdr ({ repair. ing dray. The S.M. held that the damage had been proved, and gave judgment for amount and oosts, 20* • solicitor's fee, 20a. To be? paid 3tT j^fra&Tof £1 a month. * " " ■'"***' " H. E. Cole v. Martio Williamson. —Claim £3. Judgment" for £2 8s and costs, 63. Cbiminal.-'.^,^,., -," ,; ■ ■ - ■ ■ "* *• _ " ' * f Elizabeth Jane Coley wayfehpr&BS r ' G . with using insSlting^ Iflfn^ft^ %^ T '* Jamas Andrew^. ,'; ''\ r " v? a'lf»^m. ■'.; * Jatnes Andrewa was oh&rgtsf committing an : . assatill; oii :^lll&bettf ! » <if Jane'Coley. ' '-* ' *-'»?«i«co-jj I b^| Mr Ray appeared for J. Andrewi,* >; Mr Innes appeared for E. J. Ooley. All witness' 'weWoflftftc^ t» leave the Court; ; " * * '^"- *i«« Both cases were .heard together. Mr r lnnes « i? u frsffl#> The case waMttbß]|gf|Mft a t one and brought out extraordinary con* tradictory evidence.

The S.M., in,. giving his decision, laid it was clekr?.thatthe: > parties had been giving crD»a:e.yidence, and thus placed oertajn^|ffic^[ti|s;.ln arriving at a perfe^w^pms'vjiudgment. It was not msß«^^deht%pw'Mrs Colay got the wb|t|h^^ifididbnbtedly blow received, ,a^q[/|©^en 4 if Andrews had given it herJ^fouftf npt - convict of -an assault the evidence it was fihjOWO ha wflfl 'ver.y jnuch pro.-. vokedTwlSßAE^d^ so* ,He did not think |m^^s ; wa^ .:ia^tidnal, but was probably given f 'whilst defending himself I .* 'IntMnhg : at? the* ■ Whole circumstances «of the iksey and that the action-for-bad language was only taken out'after it was known that an action. *for an assault had been laid he would dismiss both cases.