R. M. COURT, GISBORNE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 219, 26 August 1884, Page 2

R. M. COURT, GISBORNE.

THIS DAY. (Before J. Booth, Esq., R.M.) Aislabie v. J. Dalton. No appearance of defendant. Claim, £ll I3s. 7d. Judgment for amount and costs. Jl'atts v. Biddals. No appearance of defendant. Claim £1 2s. Judgment for amount and costs. Curtis r. Hyland. No appearance of defendant. Claim, £4 3s. 6d. Judgment by default and costs £1 Is. Erskine v. Campbell. Judgment summons. No appearance of plaintiff. Struck out. Porter v. Morrow and Others. The amount was paid into Court less mileage. Mr. Watson, for plaintiff, applied for the mileage. His Worship could not grant the application. 1 Mackay v. Hanlon. Claim £l3 14s. 4d. for board and lodging and cash lent.

Mr. McDougall for plaintiff, and Mr. Rees for defendant.

Mr. Rees pointed out that the costs of nonsuit must be paid before the case could be proceeded with. Mr. McDougall paid the amount. Mrs. Mackay, wife of plaintiff, gave evidence as to the particulars of the charges, which were for board and lodging of defendant, his wife, and children, and various sums of money lent. The money was lent by witness to Mrs. Hanlon. Defendant told his wife in witness’s presence to go out and buy timber from Hurrey to build a house for themselves. Mrs. Hanlan wanted to get the timber from King, but defendant declined. On the 7th June Hurrey’s collector came for money. Mr. Rees objected to the line of evidence. Witness continued—Mrs. Hanlon got her to buy nails for her, and also sold her a pair of gloves. She had received sums of money from Mrs. Hanlon amounting to £9. Neither defendant nor his wife ever paid me other sums than those recorded. By Mr. Rees—l did not receive any of the cash lent back again. Mrs. Hanlon left my house unknown to me, and sent a carter for her things. Mr. Hanlon did not leave at the same time. I don’t remember saying in Capt. Tucker’s preesence that Mrs. Hanlon was very free with her money, nor her reply that she did not owe me anything. I saw her pay Capt. Tucker a years rent in advance. I did not see Hanlon leave the house. I did not ask Hanlon for the money, because I thought his wife would return and pay me. Mrs. Hanlon had such meals as she required in my house. She was not away every day to my knowledge. She did not take her meals with the other boarders, but had them when she liked, and where she thought fit. I have no receipts but the books which Mrs. Hanlon has not been through. Hanlon was away for some days during the time for which board is charged. I did not get a pair of gloves in exchange for the pair I sold Mrs. Hanlon.

Mr. Rees submitted that plaintiff must be nonsuited as there was no evidence as to any money being due. Mr. McDougall replied at some length. He submitted that £l6 Is. 4d. and the sums for nails and gloves had been proved. Mr. Rees contended that nothing was proved on which the Court could give a verdict. His Worship said there was no proof of a debt existing between Alexander Mackay and James Hanlon. He could only grant a nonsuit. Costs, £1 Is. 6d. Porter v. Horomona Hap al. Judgment summons for £BB 12s. Mr. Watson for plaintiff. The judgment was obtained in 1879. Defendant said the Court had not said anything to him since, and he did not understand that judgment had been given to him. He had. received various sums of money since 1879, but had not paid the debt owing to the state of some accounts about his father's money. He raised the point that £9O remained between his father and Captain Porter. He did not recollect the Court ruling against him when the claim for his father’s money was made. The Bench cautioned witness to be careful, as the judgment against him and also in the matter of his father’s money was in the Court records. Defendant must either be very forgetful or else was wilfully perjuring himself.

Witness continued—He gave evidence in the case, and when he went down Captain Porter went up into the box. He had received money from Captain Porter, but plaintiff had only asked him about two years ago to pay the amount of the judgment. Captain Porter offered to settle the matter at that time by foregoing some of the amount. Captain Porter gave evidence as to a number of properties held by defendant. He had ample means to pay, and was in receipt of large sums for many blocks. He had never pressed the defendant although he had paid him many sums of money since judgment was obtained.

Order made to pay the amount by Ist December, in default three month’s imprisonment, costs £2 6s.