RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.—GISBORNE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1347, 25 August 1883, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.—GISBORNE.

[Before J. Booth, Esq., R.M.J Yesterday. J. Hearfield v. Thomas Chris?. Claim for carting night-soil from the private premises of the defendant for one year, from June 1881 to June, 1832. The plaintiff stated that he was the contractor for carting the night-soil out of the Borough. He had carted the same from the defendant’s private premises for some considerable time, and had never been paid for so doing. He had made application for it to defendant, but he ulwaya denied the debt. His charge was Is per box for the first three months, and the rest was at Is 6d. He was permitted to do so by the contract which bound him with tho Borough Council, and which he now produced to substantiate his statement. He had a book in which he made an entry each time he emptied the boxes. It contained the dates, names, &0., and each entry was made at the time the work was done, He had never received anything on account, he was positive of that, as each time he was paid he crossed the name off, but the entries against the defendant, which were clearly shown, were not crossed off. He never had a partner at this time, nor did any one collect money for him, Tho defendant (Captain Thomas Chrisp) stated that he had paid part of the amount claimed, and that the plaintiff had had another person collecting his money. He produced a receipt signed by another person on behalf of the plaintiff. This clearly proved that the plaintiff’s statement was incorrect, and that he had a person collecting money for him. He had paid a collector some of this claim. His Worship asked if he could produce any receipts to support his statement. Captain Chrisp replied that receipts were not generally given for such small sums as Is and Is 6cf. He did not do so. The plaintiff stated that the receipt put in by Mr Chrisp as showing that his monies were collected by another party was an exceptional one. He did not have a collector as a general rule. His Worship considered that the plaintiff had not made out his case, and he would therefore dismiss it. Brassey afd Fraser v. Peters.

Adjourned till the 21st. Nicholas and Co. v. Rawhirihika. No appearance of defendant. Mr Kenny, for plaintiffs, said this was a judgment summons for L 9 4s, given in November last, and which had not yet been settled. After hearing the plaintiff an order wm made that the amount be paid into court by this day six weeks, in default of payment 14 days’ imprisonment. W. Adair v. J. Turton. Mr Turton for the defendant pleaded not indebted. The plaintiff stated that the debt was contracted in Ormond by the defendant with one George Turnbull, who sold out to plaintiff, and also assigned his estate to him, and he now produced the power of attorney to collect his book debts, the defendant being included among them as a debtor. He knew Turnbull’s writing, and that is his signature to the power of uttorny. I also produce Turnbull’s original book with the items. Mr Turnbull is not at present in Gisborne ; the power of attorney is in his handwriting. Mr G. K. Turton said he would object to the power of attorney being put in. Examination continued—He could lot say whether Mr Turnbull delivered these goods to defendant or not. If the defendant states that he was at this time working for Mr Breingan I should say that it is a falsehood. I have written to defendant several times for the payment of this account, and he has always denied the debt. James Turton deposed—l am not indebted for the amount .sued for or any part of it. In November and December, 1878, I was working for Mr R. Breingan. I am sure of that. I got so much u week and my tucker. I was not married then, and I had no occasion so get any stores. I never gave anyone an order to get things for me. I knew a Mr Strong at Ormond. I got goods from him I never got any goods from Turnbull. I never knew a man of that name at

Ormond, 1 have never had a letter from Mr Adair asking for payment of the accotiflt; and it was only about Tuesday last that Mr Adair applied to me for it, That was the first time, Mr Adair said that he would aecept a nonsuit, and asked that Mr Turnbull’s evidence might be taken at Kawakawa, where he now was, by commission. Nonsuited accordingly.