RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XII, Issue 69, 21 March 1877, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

[Before L. Broad, Esq., &>!.] ••••■■■ Ftraious Riding. <-.„,. Frederick Mills was charged with riding furiously in (Brook-street. .' Mr Gully appeared for J the' Corporation, "Under one of' whose bye-laws the information was laid. He said that he did not press for a heavy penalty, as this was the first case under the bye-law, but it was merely brought forward to serve as a warning. Defendant admitted that he was racing. His Worship having read the boy a lecture, and warned him that in the event of his haying injured anyone by his reckless riding, his parents would have had to pay allexpenaes, fined him ss, and costs Us 6d. ; ' ! - : Thomas King was charged with the same offence. Defendant, who evidently hailed from the Emerald Isle, said he didn't know he was, doing anything wrong. He was not riding: with the' other boy, but passed hiui. The Bench: The other defendant admits that he was racing,; and you say you passed him. " You must therefore have been going , faster than he. 1 Fined ss, and costs 1,65~6d. ..-, " • iRoAD Rates. Thompson v. \Malcolm.~ Action to recover £1 9s for road! rates. Mr Acton Adams appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Fell for "the'-' defendant. ' i : TV Mr Adams said that. this was a friendly ■ action brought, by one ojficer of the Waimea Road Board against another to settle the question whether in accordance with the provisions of the Sating' Act the Board had power to levjr a rate for the financial yeTat endingrJune next, as many of the ratepayers, urged that it was illegalfor the Board to collect the rate after the 31st of March. The Board had been advised; that they could do so, and -this was brought a3 a test action. The 33th, section of the\ M ;Rating Act" provided as follows:—" It shall not be lawful' for any local body, after the 3 1st day of March, 1877, to make any rate except under the provisions of this Act, but any rates or arrears of rates made before the passing of this Act, or made after the passing thereof for any period ending not later than such 31st day of March, may be duly collected sued for and recovered at any time thereafter, as if this Act had not been passed." Now, the rate had been levied by the- Board on the 31st September last, which was prior to the passing of the Act, so that to his mind there could.be no doubt of its legality. Mr Fell said that he had_been instructed to appear for the defendant, but from the construction of the section referred to there could, he thought, be no question as to the power of the Board to levy the rate. A comma in the seetion completely settled the matter, and he could not see that there was any argument for the defendant. His Worship said he had looked into the matter, and was of precisely the same opinion. For once an Act of Parliament had actually been punctuated. He had reason to believe that some people had been misled by what he had said at the Suburban North Assessment Court, where he had ruled that the rate could not be recovered after the 31st of March, but this was because he had understood that the rate was not levied until the 3 1st of Octoberj which made it quite a different thing. Iu the present case, however, the rate had been levied before the passing of the Act, and consequently was recoverable for the whole year. No inconvenience, however, need arise from this, as under the 38 th section ithe next rate could be levied for any period less than a year, a power that was not granted by the previous Act. The judgment would be for the plaintiff. Debt Case. Healy v. Wytie.— Mr Bunny, who appeared for the plaintiff, said that a summons" had been issued against the defendaut, who was : living in Wellington, for £3 15s 6d, and that he had sent the amount of his debt, but had not forwarded the cost of the summons. He had been telegraphed to about it,*, but had taken no notice of the telegram, and hence the action. Judgment "for plaintiff for amount claimed and costs. Illegal Poundage. Turner v. jßroiore.--.The plaintiff in this case claimed 15s for money paid by him to the defendant/for poundage by defendant of plaintiff's horses, and for damage a'leged to have been done by them, : the same having been illegally impounded by defendant, and no damage having been done by them. Mr Fell appeared for, the plaintiff, and Mr Acton Adams for the defendant. This was one of those interminable Happy Valley cases, in which, as Mr Fell in opening the case said, the contending parties were neighbors, which of . all causes was perhaps the most fertile of disagreements. . ' ' ' ; ' After hearing evidence, at considerable length, his Worship gave judgment for plaintifl for 15s without costs, on the ground that although his horses had been .clearly, trespassing, the defendant had no right to impound them. " - -