HAWERA.

Patea Mail, Volume V, Issue 50, 17 January 1880, Page 2

HAWER A.

( I-'ROM OUR OWN COKRESRONDENT.) January i (!. Messrs Williamson and Ada ms were singularly unfortunate with their entertainment Imre, the weather on botli evenings being very bad, consequently they had poor houses. It was well worth going (o see, being amusing us well as instructive. The Hawera Town Hall Company held their annual general meeting on Wednesday afternoon, and the shareholders may congratulate themselves that it is the. best paying hall on the coast. The amount received for the use of the hail was ovor £i-3U, more than double last year’s, the greater part of which has been spent on improvements. The directors now contemplate lining the hall. R E SID EN T M A GIS TRAT E’ S COURT. Thursday, .January 15. (Before Capt. Wray, R. M.) M. O’Connor, one of the Armed Constabulary, was summoned under the Vagrant Act, for keeping a gambling tabic at the Norm an by sports. — Reginald Blaker said that ho was at Normanby on the sports day, but did not see any gambling instruments there. Constantine King gave his evidence very reluctantly, stating at last that he saw defendant with a dice box.—The case was adjourned until next Court day for further evidence. Walter Franklin, another constable, was charged with the same offence at Hawera athletic sports. Defendant pleaded guilty,—Captain Marshall said the man had been imprisoned in the guard-room for fifteen dajs on a similar charge. He had homo a good character. —The R.M. said that in consideration of the good character given by his officer, ho would only sentence him to 21 hours imprisonment. T. Crowhurst v J. Whitmore, AllBarley man for plaintiff, and All Farrington for defendant. This was a case of assault. —lt appeared from the evidence of the plaintiff that ho had some bees, and some of the bees swarmed and left his garden for fresh fields and pastures new, and landed in the defendant’s garden. Plainttiff wont for his bees, but defendant having a weakness for honey, declined to give up possession. A few warm words ensued, when the defendant caught hold of plaintiff by the waistcoat, and slung him into an onion bed, smashing his watch guard, and doing other damage to both property and person. Some money was also lost in the transaction out of plaintiff’s pocket. Plans were put before the Court to shew where the bees were first, and whore they had roosted afterwards. Plaintiff could not swear to the bees, as he had not branded them. He had previously had a row with delendant about some ** chickens.” Two witnesses were brought by the plaintiff to substantiate his evidence. —Air Par- | rington said that he would not go on any farther with this ease, as there was a cross summons.

J. Whitmore v T Crmvhurt.—■ John Whitmore recolleted the 2 ( Jlh of December last with pleasure. He was expecting some tees to swarm on that day. They cam?, and he hived them. Crowhnrst came and ashed him for the bees. He .seemed very excited. Witness was in a very good temper, and told Crowhurst he emPd . not ha ve the bees. When clcl’endaiWt.was leaving, ho struck a blow at plaintiff, who caught him by the waistcoat. Crowhurst had Whitmore's head m chancery, it was just on the onion bed, but. defendant happened to fall instead of plaintiff. They had not been particularly good neighbours lately, through defendant’s “chickens” annoying him.-—HisWoiship said ho would reserve judgment until next Court duv.

G. V. Bale vG. Dyer. Mi' Farrington for plaintiff. Claim £Bl JOs on promissory note. Judgment for plaintiff for full .amount and costs, with solicitor’s fee £2 2s.

McL’Dowie & Co. v A. B. Knight, claim £2 5s yd, for goods supplied. Judgment for plaintiff lot amount claimed and costs.