RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 65, 28 June 1873, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Thursday, June 26. [Before W. K. Nesbitt, Esq., R.M.; and J. B. Poynter, Esq., J.P.] Wi Peri v. AnMESon. —Claim £22 10s for 1500 posts supplied. Judgment for £l3 5s and costs. Bybne v. Mackey.—Debt 14s. Judgment for amout with costs. Hale v. Boland.—£2 claimed for damage done to plaintiff’s dog. No appearance. Pobteb v. Anderson.—Claim £12 —breach of agreement to deliver 600 posts. Mr. Brooke Taylor appeared for the defendant and admitted liability. Judgment accordingly. Curtis v. Rawibi Titibangi and anotheb. —Claim £5, damages for trespass and injuring sheep. Judgment for plaintiff 10s and costs. Bousfield v. Wi Paraone. —Claim £5 5s for surveying part of the Rangatira block. Adjourned to next Thursday. Te Paki and othebs v. Murphy.—Claim £4o—balance of rent to let May, 1873. Mr. Cuff appeared for plaintiffs. —Te Paki deposed to the sum of £4O liaving been out of the afifl that it had never been done before. The land in question had been leased to Mr. Locke; a copy of the deed was produced, which Mr. Cuff objected to as being received in evidence. The Court upheld Mr. Cuff’s objection, whereupon defendant applied for an adjournment for one month, to enable him to procure the original Deed of Lease, which, he stated, contains a clause providing for the payment of 10 per cent, duty by the Lessors. Adjournment granted. Cross v. Scott. —Claim for 14s damages, for illegally impounding a horse. Mr- Cuff for plaintiff; Mr. Brooke Taylor for defendant. This was, according to counsel, a friendly suit to determine what “ a cultivation ” is in terms of the Impounding Act. Defendant had impounded a horse belonging to plaintiff, from off his land which had been planted with trees, fenced, and occupied as pasture for stock, which he held to be cultivated ground. The Bench coincided with this view, and gave judgment for defendant accordingly.