Magistrate's Court, Foxton.

Manawatu Herald, 8 February 1896, Page 2

Magistrate's Court, Foxton.

(Before B. L. Stanford, E.^q., S.M.)

Thursday, Februabt 6.

CIVIL OASES.

A. Krr v James Moa .— Claim, 8« Id. Judgment for amount and costa, 6-».

T. N. Newth v. William Cameron

ritiin £1 <No appearance of defendant. Judgm n by default for amount claimed and costs, 6*.

T. N Newih ? D.ivid Margetts. - Claim 10d. No appearanoe of defendant. Judgment by default for amount and costs, 6-«.

P Hennery & Co. V. Rori Heta. Claim, £1 14a. Defendant ac knowledged debt. Judgment for amount and costs, 6*.

T. Weatwood & Qo. v. S. Fowler. — Oaim, £8. No appearance of defendant. Judgment by default for amount and costs, 18b.

A. Eerr v. Wi Hemara. —Claim, £2 103. No appearanoe of defendant. Judgment by default for amount and co^ts, 7s.

Jame* L'dcL'll v. L. Halcrow. — Claim £2 17a 101. Judgment for plaintiff by confession wit;i coats, 6s. James Liddell v. F. Taylor.— Claim £6 4i 6d. No appearance of defendant. Judgment by default for amount and coats, 10s.

James Liddell v. William Cameron. -Claim £2 2s id. No appearance of defendant. Judgment by default for amount and coats, 63.

S. Startup v. Robert Taylor.— Claim fl Is. No appearance of defendant. Judgment by default for amount and costs, 63.

8. Startup v A. B. Hardy.— Claim £1 8$ 6d. No appearance of defendant. Judgment for costs, 69, the claim having been paid previously. George Nye v. Wi Hemera. No appearance of defendant. This was a judgment summons. The matter had been allowed to stand over for 8 months to permit defendant to make arrangemtntg with Mr Nye. The S.M. said he was satisfied defendant had money and he would make an order.

It was ordered that the amount be paid forthwith, order suspended for one month, in default of payment one month's imprisonment in Wanganui goal. T. Westwood & Co. v. W. H. Howe. No appearance of defendant. This was a judgment summons.

Plaintiff awore that the defendant had been contracting for some time and had been in a position several times to pay accounts.

The SM. adjourned the case to next Court day.

James Gibson v. C. Richards.— Claim £B Is. Mr Innes applied for plaintiff. Mr Wallace for defendant.

v James Gibson gave evidence as to defendant owning certain pigs and to the damage they had done to his garden. He had been permitted to fence a portion of the road whilst he grew a live fence.

In cross examination the plaintiff gave details of damages.

Ernest Smith did not see the pig do the damage but a few days afterwards saw the effects of some pig which had been rooting. Valued the loss at £2.

In cross examination said damage was done in front part of the garden.

A. Richardson, for the defence, deposed that plaintiff made no claim prior to summonsing. On the occassion of releasing the pig on the first occassion the pig was on the road lying in the grass. Plaintiff did not say where the pig got in, nor what money he wanted, except that ''the pig don't go till I am paid." The garden showed no signs of damage on the day and after the pig was taken away. Considered he had as much right to the road as plaintiff. The cross-examination did not discio»e more than that plaintiff could not say whether his pig might not have been in the garden when he was away. Jameß Richardson, son of defend* ant, admitted being sent for by plaintiff to fetch pig which he found on the road inside of plaintiff's land. Plaintiff would not let witness take pig away as he wanted to be paid. The pig went up to the gate. Soon his father came and they let the pig out. Believed the pig had got into the gaiden by the gate. David Stratton said he had never seen any damage done, did not think there had been any pig in. On cross-examination witness said " I would not give threepence for all the damage done, others might." The S.M. asked Mr Innes to show him under what Aot he sued for damages by trespass for pigs. Mr lunes quoted sections 6, 6, and 14 of the Impounding Act. The S M. said they were not applicable to the present case, the proper course was to kill the pig And send word to the owner, and sue for tresspass rates. Mr lanes then said he was prepared to accept a nonsuit. The S M. granted a nonsuit with costs.

George Blanche v. A. Demlar.— Claim £19 8-> 4d. Counter claim, £17 14a 6d. Mr Wallace for plaintiff. Mr Bay for defendant. Adjourned to Paimerston. Witnesses, 16* ; solicitor's lee. 21s. Florence Trask v. Mrs £. Wilson. — Claim £7 4s. Counter claim, J69 10a. Order made for return of goods and counter claim of £8. No costs to either party.

Prohibition Order.

On the application of Constable Gillespie a prohibition order was granted against John Spelman to apply to all the licensed houses in the Borough of Foxton.