RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Manawatu Times, Volume III, Issue 52, 10 April 1878, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

PAIiMERSTOiN NORTH. Thubbdat, April. 4th, 1878. (Before E. Ward,- Eaq,, &&£).' civm cases. - . George Boyd v.. Hastwell r Macara & Cbv Claim, £8 14s. vll . „. Mr. Staite appeared for plaintiff., . \ There was no, proof of service of sum*raons, and the 'case was adjourned "until next Court day. Counsel, however}, stated that the claim was put forward for toll for the coaches of which defendants were the proprietors, and wished to obtain the ruling of the Bench as towhether plaintiff, could stop the eoach in'the meantime? His Worship said that without hearing the evidence on both sides, he ' could scarcely be prepared to giveadvice in the matter. He would, however, advise that a claim should, bo made on each occasicn, which could be added to the total. Tho.nas Wray V. H. M. Cfamond. Cfoim, £7 2s (id, the price of one paw of hinaes, a.«d a hnns mounted truck harness. The case had been adjourued from last Court day, at request of defend int., fifteen shillings cost having been allowed for the postponement, but as he again did not appear, judgment was given in default, with costs. Corporation v. J.ijr. Ansiee. Claim, £1 13s 9d, for nine months* rates, at 9J in the pound. Mr Staite? appeared for the defendant, and ask, d f -r proof of the appointment of Me Heeling (who represented the Corporation) as Town Clerk, and rate collector. Tito case was adjourned for half an hour to enable that officer to produce evidence to that effect.' - At its expiration,: the minutes of the Council, were handed up to the Bench, and Mr Staite, waiving the production of the Gazetted notice, admitted the appointment. The Town Clerk then gave evidence of the service of the applica* tionfor rates, but could not swear that it had ever reached defendant. Mr. Staite svid that, had it been proven that the Court had jurisdiction in

thii cas "N ne CDU^ c l a ™ a nonsuit on two\ points : first, that although his client might have, been an occupier whenVhe rate had been struck, he was not inVpossession at the time the rate became*jdue; and secondly, there was no proofVthat the application hail ever reached Mm. He, however, preferred to base his; objection upon another'' point, and ; tfittt_was that MrJEeelirig had no power to^mal:elin~amdaviton behalf of the Corporation, lie should have been the plaintiff in the case instead of the Corpbration, and such not having been the case; he claimed that the Court had no jurisdiction. An exactly similar case had recently been heard before the Chief Justice, in which the manager of a bank had made the .affidavit although the bank was the plaintiff, and his Honor had given his ruling that the Court had no jurisdiction. Even supposing thatthe Corporation were the plaintiffs, the seal of the Borough should have been attached. The Bench admitted that the Act bore out the assertions of Mr Staite, and therefore ruled that it had no jurisdiction in the matter. His Worship advised the Town Clerk in future to bring all cases for the Corporation in his own name. He thanked Mr Staite for raising the point of law, which, had it been overlooked, and judgment given, might have caused some litigation. , The case would therefore be dismissed without prejudice, Mr Keeling being competent to bring it up again in his own There: were a number of similar cases /on the list, but the Town Clerk elected to withdraw them for the present, in order to act upon the advice of the Bench! In the case of the Corporation t. Porson, the defendant stated that he had not a foot of land in New Zealand, and -as the case • was withdrawn, he claimed expenses. - His Worship however informed him that having no jurisdiction, he could not deal with the matter. There were a perfect host of debt rases, but in all of which no proof of service of summons could be adduced, and they were consequently postponed till next court day.