R. M. COURT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume IX, Issue 54, 5 February 1885, Page 3

R. M. COURT.

THIS DAY. (Before R. Ward, Esq., R.M.) ASSAULT. Tabita Matina v. Gri Urupa. Mr Hankinsfor inftrinant and Mr Staite for defence. The informant deposed that on the 19th January last, she- occupied an upstairs room m her house at Awahuri and defendant got m a window of the room and struck her and threatened to shoot her. She ran out of the house and defendant followed and struck and kicked her several times. By Mr Sfcaite : She had not returned to tho house being afraid of defendant who resided at tho houso before she did. Cohabited according to native custom some time before but she had published a notice of their separation. Threatened before to put defendant m gaol and assaulted him. Niniwa (Native) deposed that he saw blows struck by Tabita and defendant kick her. Was not present at the commencement of the quarrel. Saw Tabita take up a spade to strike defendant. Thought that defendant kicked m selfdefence. The Magistrate thought that it was a case of six of one and half-a-dozen of the o fchor. There was not sufficient evidence to bind the defendant over to keep the peace. Charge -dismissed. CIVIL CASES. j. and W. A. McDowell v. Jas. Buchanan. Claim .£1 10s 6. Judgment for plaintiff and costs 10s. Same v. Ed. Simmons. Claim £2 16s 3d. Judgment by default, with costs 11s. Same v. Houita to Awe Awe. Claim £1 los Gd. Judgment for plaintiff and costs 1,55. Fred. Maule v. Thos. Griggs. Claim £2 Is for milk. Judgment by consent for amount with 10s costs to be paid by instalments of 10s per month. Thos. King v. Palmerston Brewery Company. Claim i-66. Judgment confessed by Mr Walegrave as Managing Director. Mr J. H. Hankins for plaintiff objected to the confession by reason of its not being authorised by the company under its seal. ' Mr Baker contended that under the Company's acts the confession was valid. The Magistrate said the plaintiff had a right to get a good sound judgment and thought it would be bettor to let plaintiff take a judgment m the usnal way. After the plaintiff had given evidence m support of his claim, judgment was given for the amount claimed and costs £5 Bs. Fred. Gillett v. Nicholas Marchant. Judgment summons. Claim .£l9 2s. Mr J. H. Hankins for judgment creditor. No appearance of debtor. Ordered to be paid fortwith m default 14 days m Wellington gaol. J. and H. A. McDowell v. Geo. Hawkins. Judgment summons. Claim £S Bs. No appearance of debtor. Amount to be paid m one month or 8 days imprisonment. A. S. Baker v. Ollivier and Brown. Claim £9 12s for costs. Mr Johnston appeared for defendants. Plaintiff non-suited with costs 21s. Chap. Hartley v. Joseph Boale. Claim £12, the value of a horse detained by deiendant. Mr Eaker for plaintiff and Mr Hankins for defendant. Plaintiff gave evidence that he had lost a horse some time ago and found it m the possession of defendant. He was the owner of the horse and never sold it to anyone. Did not authorise his son to sell or take away the horse. Receive 1 a letter from his son admitting that he had sold the horse and that the proceeds had been stolen from him. Said to his son " bother the horse I wish I could sell ] him." A man named Brown informed me that he had bought the horse. Had -previously bought the horse from his son, but it was not to evade his creditors. Charles Brown deposed that he understood from Charles Hartley that bis father had authorised him to sell the horse. He sold the horse, and handed the purchase money ( £10) to plaintiff's son. Sometime after, m conversation, the plaintiff informed witness that he had authorised his son to sell the horse. Charles Hartley, son of plaintiff,sworn, said his father had authorised him to sell the horse for £7. The letter produced admitting sale of horso and signed " Charley" was not written or sent by him. He could not write (except his nnme) or re.idj His father never told him to bnng the horse back. Sold the horse throueh witness, Brown. Thomas Goodison deposed that he had bad a conversation will) plaintiff sometime m November last. He said he had authorised bin son to sell the horse, and thnt his son had sold the horse through Mr Brown and hnd stuck to the money. Judgment for defendant with costs. G. W. Shailer v. W. L. Luxford. Claim £Q value of box of clothe* detained from plaintiff's daughter. Mr Bayley Hawkins forplaintiff an that the box had been returned and the only question for the court to decide was the amount of costs to be awarded to plaintiff, Mr J. H. Hankins for defendant objected to payment of costs. The Magistrate gave judgment for plaintiff with costs 325. , ■ [Left Sitting.]