MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Putaruru Press, Volume II, Issue 25, 3 April 1924, Page 2

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

SOME UNRULY BEHAVIOUR. Offenders Punished. A sitting of the Tutaruru Magisirate’s court was held in the Town Hall on Friday, Mr. J. G. L. Hewitt, S.M., presiding until the luncheon adjournment, at 1 p.m., when he left for Rotorua. Messrs. R. Alcorn and J. Barr Brown, J.’sP., presided at the afternoon sitting, dealing with a case of assault. To a charge of using threatening behaviour in the main street at Putaruru on November 29, Wereroa Hamare, a middle aged native, pleaded guilty. Constable Murphy explained that on the date in question accused and another native had an altercation. Accused was under the influence of liquor and took oil his coat to fight. A fine of £1 and costs, 7s, was imposed. THEFT OF A WHIP. The theft of a whip, valued at ss, and the property of Mr. J. W. Anderson, at Tirau on December 20, was a charge preferred against Toby Piena, who did not attempt to answer it. The police stated that the accused took the whip and drove away with it. The owner, however, followed him in a car and recovered the whip. * Fined £l, four times the value of the whip, and costs 10s,” remarked the Magistrate. ASSAULTING A NATIVE. A plea of not guilty was made by John (“ Jock ”) Martin, a young man, .to a charge of assaulting a native named Matakino at Putaruru on December 22, by striking him on the face. Matakino, in evidence, said that he was coming out of the hotel and met accused coming in. He caught hold of the lapels of accused’s coat as he had had a few drinks and his head was swimming. Accused told him to let go but he did not comply at once, and accused hit him and knocked him down, then hitting him thrice in the face when he was down. Someone then pulled them apart. This evidence was corroborated in the main by J. Hamaha. Accused said he hit Matekino only once to make him loose his hold. He did not hit him when on the ground. He was convicted and fined £1 and costs £3 11s. A QUESTION OF LIABILITY. It was a question as to who was liable for payment of the amount, when a claim by J. Paterson and Sons, Putaruru, against Ben Williams, farm manager, of Tokoroa, was called. The amount was £ll 12s Gd for cutting 15i tons of chair, at 15s per ton. There was no dispute as to this being owing to plaintiffs, but the question was whether defendant or the estate by which lie was employed was liable for payment. Defendant explained that when he arranged with plaintiffs to cut the chaff on Matanuku Downs, lie thought they certainly knew he was the manager, and not the owner, of the property, though lie did not specifically tell them. Some time ago the owner died anil as a probate of his estate had not yet been granted the amount could not yet be paid. Plaintiffs denied that they knew defendant was only the manager when they contracted with him to cut the chaff, the engagement being booked to him personally. The magistrate: It is really only a matter of paper. As the defendant did not make it quite clear he was the manager, and not the owner, he is liable, and in his turn can obtain the money from the estate. sc:2ovee orithe hifiij 17. h ainsc.j HM Judgment was given for the plaintill’s for the amount claimed, plus costs, £4 17s. Judgment for the plaintiffs by default was given in the followingcases:— The Commissioner of Taxes v. H. Missen, £5 9s 7d, costs £1 4s; Rose Bros., Ltd., v. A. E. Alexander, £lB 3s 7d, costs £2 14s; Norman T. Todd v. A. E. Alexander, £l6 ss, costs £2 14s; J. Keane v. Thos. Bottomley, £l2 18s, costs £2 14s.