R. M. COURT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume VIII, Issue 127, 6 November 1884, Page 3

R. M. COURT.

THIS DAY.

H; (BeJEbre R. Ward, Esq., R.M.) . Chimney on Fire. j. t>. Fraser, was fined 5s and „'. costs. • . ■•■■ Civil Cases. Judgment for plaintiffs with costs , m the following case* :— Borough ofPalmerston v. Dransfield. Claim £1 4s 6d for rates. • J. Rush vJ T. Hammond. Claim ' £2 for destruction of coat, vest and shirt during the sit ting of the Native land Couit at Paliuerston. ; J. If. Heatpnv. M.Beazer. Claim j£6, amount of dishonoured order. • F«Gi!lettJv. Nichol a* Marchant. Claim £16. Mr Hankins for plain- - tiff, J?P. Armstrong v.' G. N. Wood. Claim $38 9s 4d. Dishonoured pro- : owisspry note. Mr G. F. Hawkins ; .for plaintiff. .. ; ; ...... . ( .. I Gj'fcildershaw v*; Valentine HarriBon. • Claim M IBsßd. Mr FletcjieiJohnston for plaintiff. , G. Pavr v. W. Brown. Claim £9. Paid into Court £9 6*. Judgment - fbriuiither costs ,Bs, and counsel's fee. Mr G. F. Hawkins for plaintiff. ; T. Cranwell v. Native, Claim V jj^l3. Claim for training horse to run *- at "btaki races, at rate of £1 per week. Mr J. H. Hankins for plaintiff, and Mr Baker for defendant. ; After a rather lengthy heaving. The Bench gaVe judgment for plaintiff for the amount and cost. .Labceny op a door mat. , 33. C. Hopkins, labourer, was charged on the information of G. W. -Kiissell, Es^. J.P. with the larceny of a door mat.,; i " Accused pleaded Not Guilty and •was defended by Mr J. lierViert Han- ; kins.k^ : .- ' .. . ;"• : . "_;'. . Prosecutor identified the mat as his f pVoperty, foh* which he had given 12s or 148 m Wellington some four years ago. He admitted m cross-ex-amination that accused had previoiisj >lys ihteafcenled to sue him: for an tn> v j? "paijd account for the removal of night , *pil from, his residence. ; , ; Another witness, E. Keys, also expressed her belief that the mat had i\. once "belonged to the prosecutor. ! The Constable stated that the oc'ciised had stated he had found the mat m a dust heap, and had brought it home and got his wife to clean it. )..-.., ' \Aftev'"far^her evidence had been ; taken the dhkrge was dismissed on „. the application of counsel for the ac- ;. cused, on .the ground that there was - : '. no evidence whatever to warrant a conviction on the alleged charge. [Left Sitting.]