RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 49, 3 May 1873, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thvbsday, May 1. [Before W. K. Nesbitt, Esq., R.M.j and J. IL Campbell, Esq., R.M.] Dbvnkenness.—C. Campbell charged with being drunk and obstructing police in the execution’ of their duty. Fined 5s for being drunk, and 20s for assaulting the police. An alternative of'4B hours seclusion was accepted. Keke v. Stevenson. —Adjourned case. The Bench quoted from the “ Injuries by Dogs Act,” and considering the killing of the dog was justitfable, gave judgment for defendant. Goldsmith v. Dalziell. — Mr. Cuff for plaintiff. This case was based on information laid against Mr. Dalziell, as Poundkeeper, for refusing to deliver impounded cattle on demand. —T. Goldsmith sworn, stated: That he was acting for Captain Read and demanded release of certain cattle impounded by Mr. Foulgrain but was refused. I asked him wliat was due on the cattle and he said he eould not tell ine< —Bv Mr. Dalziell: I offered no money, as I did not know what was due. You did not say that I could have the cattle if I paid the charges due on them. —Mr. Dalziell said in defence that ho told Goldsmith if he paid the fees he should have the cattle. Case dismissed without costs.

Poulgrain v. Hill.—Mr. Cuff for plaintiff. Information was laid under the 29th clause of Impounding Act, for rescuing cattle on the way to the Pound.—Richard Poulgrain sworn, states: Cattle were trespassing on my land at Makauri on the 23rd ult., and f sent my lad and another to impound them. There were two bullocks among them. I did not see defendant. By defendant: I saw the two bullocks in my paddock on the morning of the 23rd. I did not know to whom they belonged. —W. Poulgrain, sworn, states : The bullocks were trespassing on my father’s land. The defendant stood in front of them with a stick, and drove them from among the mob I was taking to the pound. I did not hear you say that if L let you have the cattle, Mr. King would pay the expenses.— Pongo, who did not understand the nature of an oath, but was requested by the Beiich to speak the truth, said: There were two bullocks being driven to the Pound. I was helping to drive them. Defendant took them awuy from us. Poulgrain tried to prevent him.— W. Low for the defence sworn, states : I heard Hill say “ I want those two bullocks ” and Poulgrain answered “ if you take them you must not drive the others back.” Poulgrain offered no opposition. I was about from 70 to 150 yards off. The Bench considered that no violence was used sufficient to prove a rescue, and dismissed the case without costs.

Read v. Benson.—Mr. Wyllie appeared for defendant. Claim £5. Made under the “Resident Magistrate’s Act 1867” for mean profits accrued by the illegal occupation of a certain house the property of plaintiff. —G. Lawrence, sworn, states: lam manager for Captain Read. The house in question was let to Tarr, the lease of which has been surrendered to plaintiff. The house belongs to Read. Benson wrote to Read to say that, ho would hold possession of house and premises. I consider £5 a fair charge for rent until the 31st March.—Judgment for plaintiff £2 Bs.—ln reply to the defendant’s application the Bench granted three days in which to appeal.

Wallace v. Reeves.—Mr. Cuff for plaintiff. Claim £lO damages or for the recovery of possession of a sheep dog.—Mr. Wallace, sworn, states: 1 lent the dog to defendant. It was a valuable dog. Mr. Reeves has often asked mo to give him the dog. I promised him, through my man, that he should liave the use of it until such times as I might want it. I required it about the beginning of this year. He replied to my application for it that I liad given it to him. I denied it. My man also denied having given the dog to defendant. It is customary* to lend dogs to sheep farmers. I never authorized any one to give it aw ay.—Mr. Leech : I recollect Mr. Reeves saying that he would like the dog to break in. Mr. Wallace told me to let defendant have the dog on condition that he returned it when required. I was present when Mr. Wallace asked Mr. Reeves for the dog. —A Reeves, sworn, states :'I always considered the dog was given to me. On my way to Poverty Bay I called on plaintiff and said I would let him know whether I would take the dog or not. —John Campbell, sworn, states : his impression that the dog had been given to defendant. — Judgment for plaintiff £lO or restoration of the dbg. Barsdell y. DeVebnet.—Claim £1 16s 3d debt. Judgment for plaintiff. To be paid in one week from this date.

Kelly v. Cooper.—Claim £3 3s 3d. Defendant pleaded that he had not had sufficient notice. Case adjourned to the Bth met. Burslem v. King.—Mr. Cuff for defendant. Claim £3 18s Id, balance of wages. The sum of 6s was paid into Court.—Plaintiff sworn, states: The claim as made is just and positively owing to me—By Mr. Cuff: I engaged with defendant’s overseer at 35s a week. I bought some goods from plaintiff which I have not paid for. I did not break a pair of shafts.—Mr. Cuff for defence put in a statement of account shewing the sum of 6s duo to plaintiff paid into Court.—W. King sworn, states : I charged for the shafts because I think they were carelessly broken. I supplied him with a rope, which he did not return. Judgment for plaintiff £3 17s.