DISTRICT COURT.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1101, 18 July 1882, Page 3

DISTRICT COURT.

Gisbobxe, July 17th, 1882.

[Before Jr dos Habdoastle, District Judge). The District Court having been formally opened, Mr Kenny rose and said: —“ May it please your Honor: Before the business of the day commences, I am deputed by my brethren of the bar to welcome you to Gisborne, and to express our nope that this may prove to be only the first of many visits by your Honor to this pleasant and prosperous little town. We consider that the litigant business of the district misnamed by the Great Navigator, “ Poverty Bay,” of which this town is the commercial centre, is now more than sufficient in character and magnitude to warrant circuit sittings of the Supreme Court for thia place ; but in,the absence of those sittings, we are <lad to find that the quarterly sessions f the District Court are not to be discontinued. We congratulate ourselves that your Honor has been selected to preside here, and we beg respectfully to assure you of our cordial co-operation and support in the discharge of your often arduous, and always responsible, duties. His Honor thanked the Bar for the compliment paid to him, and assured them that he had experienced the benefits derived from a friendly spirit existing between the Bench and the Bar. He quite concurred with Mr Kenny in this respect. In reply to Mr Nolan, His Honor said that the procedure of business would be first criminal, then civil, and last bankruptcy. Mr C. D. Berry was fined in the sum of 40s for neglecting to attend to a juror’s summons.

PERJURY. Thos. McAneney was then charged with having committed wilful and corrupt perjury at the R.M. Court on June 6th. The following jury was empanelled : —E. K. Brown (foreman), D. Hepburn, James Brown, J. W. Gilliee, 8. M. Wilson, J. W. Billlwm, F. Dufaur, G. Burgess, J. East, W. Barber, A. McKay, and H. Bull. The circumstances in connection with this case will be fresh in the minds of our readers, as we at thetime gave a full report of the Court pro. ceedings. The prisoner had been working for Mr George Bougen, and the latter had given him au order for*£2 on Mr R. Austin. On May 30th Mr Austin handed Mr Bougen the money to give to McAncny, and saw him do so. The prisoner, however, thinking there had been no witness to the transaction, sued Mr Bougen, and deliberately swore the £2 bad never been received. The jury, after about a minute’s deliberation, returned a verdict of Guilty. His Honor, in passing sentence, said he was of opinion that nootliervepdict could have been arrived at. The perjury was rendered worse by prisoner having said to Mr Bougen “Noone saw you giro me the monev, aftd I tyill sue you for it.” He had, tn fact, fi Mb threatened to commit perjury, andh»d in the end done so. The sentence of the Court would be that he would hnvo to serve an imprisonment for the tepat of 12 months in Napier Gaol, wilth hprd labor, Civil Business. E. K. Brown v. Anaru Ratap Claim, £3O 12s 7d. Mr Nolan ftp.

I peared for the plaintiff. The hearing j of the case was adjourned until to-day, i as service of the summons had not • been proved. I W. Milner v. R. Cooper.—Tn this i case Mr Kenny, who appeared for the i plaintiff, applied for an adjournment, as the defendant who had confessed ! judgment for £54 10s, the actual . amount of the P.N. upon which he was i sued, had neglected to confess for the costs of the case and the interest which had accrued. The application was granted.

Mullooly v. Cooper’—Mr Kenny for the plaintiff; Mr Brassey for the defendant. On the application of Mr Brassey, and by the consent of the opposing counsel, the case was adjourned until the next sitting of the Court. H. Trimmer v. Wi Peka.—Mr Kenny for plaintiff, and Mr Ward (acting for Mr Rees) for the defendant. Adjourned until the next sifting of the Court. Andrew Reeves v. Rangihuia.—Mr Brassey for the plaintiff, and Mr Ward (acting for Mr Rees) for the defendant. Adjourned until to-day. M. Mullooly v. Arapeta Ranganui.— Claim £2ll Us 3d. Mr Kenny for plaintiff, and Mr Ward (acting for Mr Rees) for the defendant. After evidence had been taken as to the debt, judgment was given for the plaintiff for £177 8s 4d and costs (£lO 18s). The Court adjourned until half-past 10 o’clock to-day, when the sitting will be held in the R.M.'s Court.

For continuation of news see ith page.