R.M.'s COURT—GISBORNE

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume II, Issue 147, 14 March 1874, Page 2

R.M.'s COURT—GISBORNE

Thursday, March 12, 1874. "Before W. K. Nesbitt, Esq., R.M.; and J. H. Campbell, Esq., R.M. Patrick Maher was ordered to the lock-up for 48 hours, for being drunk and incapable in the streets of Gisborne. BHIRLEY V. CAULTON. Defendant was charged with having refused Sergeant Stanhope entrance to the Masonic Hotel in the execution of his duty. Sergeant Stanhope, called, deposed : I was on duty on Saturday night last at 11.35. Miss Cuulton was in the bar, and I called her at tention to the hour. At f to 12 I received information that a breach of the Licensing Act was being made in the hotel. I knocked at the side door, and in reply to the question “ who is there,” 1 said “ police.” The person inside said, “ the police can stay outside.” By Defendant. The nature of the information was that liquor was being sold in the hotel after hours. Constable Joyce called, corroborated Sergeant Stanhope’s evidence. H. E. Webb was called by defendant to disprove the fact of wilful obstruction to the police. He said he was in Mr. Caulton’s private parlor on Saturday night, when a man put his head in at the window, and demanded that the lights should be extinguished as he had been turned out of the bar. Soon after a knocking was heard at the door; Miss Caulton answered it, but concluded that it was the same man saying it was the police who wished for admission. Witness was quite sure no obstruction to the police was intended. Case dismissed. TRIMMER V. PATIHANA AUKOMIRO. Claim, £5 10s. for goods sold. Mr. M. Mullooly, who represented defendant, paid £4 13s. into Court. John Trimmer, sworn, proved the correctness of the items of the account. Judgment for amount and costs. TRIMMER V. HORI MOKOERA. Claim, £4 13s. 7d. No appearance of defendant. Proof of service of summons having been adduced. Judgment by default. TRIMMER V. HARE MOKENA. Mr. Wilson for plaintiff; Mr. Cuff for defendant. Claim £4 9s. 2d. Breach of contract in not cutting and delivering certain “ knees.” Plaintiff sworn, deposed to having supplied goods to defendant, and to non-fulfilment of contract to supply certain knees, for which he claimed £5 damages. By Mr. Cuff : I made the contract with defendant. He was so have cut from 50 to 100 knees, and he supplied none. Hare Mokena, sworn, said that the goods claimed for had been delivered to him, but he had given them away. With respect to the contract he said no written agreement was made. He agreed to cut some knees for plaintiff at 2s. each, and drew the goods on the strength of the work. He was to allow plaintiff £1 for drawing the knees from the bush. Mr. Trimmer, rc-called, said that the goods were got before the agreement to cut the knees was entered into. That nothing was said about an allowance of £1 for delivering, and that defendant had the use of his (plaintiff’s) bullocks for the purpose of delivering the knees. Judgment for amount claimed, and damages £5 with costs. J. CUFF V. M. MULLOOLY. Claim, £3 13s. 6d. for professional services rendered. Mr. Wilson for defendant.. Plaintiff, sworn, stated, that Mr. Mullooly had agreed to let Robert Williams a certain section, for which a lease had been prepared. Mullooly subsequently signed the deed, but on account of a difference with Williams, had destroyed it, and he (the plaintiff) now sought to recover the other half of the cost of preparing the lease, together with £2 2s. loss of time consequent on the defendant’s conduct. By Mr. Wilson : The lease was signed only by Mullooly. M. Mullooly, sworn, states: I did not employ Mr. Cuff to make out the lease. Williams raised some shuffling objections, and I said he should not have the land, and I tore up the lease. The Bench held that Mr. Cuff should recover one-half his fee from Williams, and gave judgment for £1 Is. for loss of time.