PUKEKOHE MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 5, Issue 193, 21 July 1916, Page 3

PUKEKOHE MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

'lh.' isual fortrightfy pitting of the Pukekohe Magistrate's Court was i.elil ytsterd-y before Mr F. V. Fraz j r, S.M.'

BRfciACH Ob' INFANTS' ACT. Mrs Ludwig, of Whangarata, was pre c eded against, at the instance of th I spector under tte Infants Act, tar having an infjnt in her care in cine iteration of payment without being licensed as a foster parent. The defendant pleaded guilty, but explained that she had acted in ignorance. Cowan stated ttut, the child was being wall looked after aod the only comprint was that the defendant had tot made application to be registered. In tepl ; to the Magistrate, the defendant stated that sha was Poking after the child out ot good nature and during the six months the bad bad it she had only received £6 Irom ltd mother and all the marey had been spent on clothes or mcdicin» for it. The Magistrate considered that the prosecution had only been brought as a warning to others and that justice would be met by the defendant paying the Court costs 7s. A TENANCY DISPUTE. A claim by Mrs Elizabeth Burdus, of Papakura, was made againot Jesse J. Hill', settler, of Palmerston North, for £l2 10s in respect of the tenancy of a bouse at Pukekohe East, of which the plaintiff bad failed to get poßeegsion after paying a month's rent in advance Mr 11. G. It. Mason appeared for the plaintiff and Mr W. P. Hopkins for the defendant. The circumstances were that the defendant had been the owner of a house, with faim attached, at Pukekohe East and that the fouse was let to tlaintiff by MeES'S Smith and Hale mbe, of Auckland, who had been acting is defendant's Bgents. It appeared that some time before the tenancy was arranged the defendant bad sold the property and tte case was complicated by the tact that in the meantime Mr Halcombe, cue 'of the prircipals in the agency firm, had dieel, the defendant claiming that he had verbally mtormed Mr Halcombe that he hsd disposed cf tte property, whilst Mr Smith maintained that no information was conveyed to him of the sal". Mr Smith, however, admitted (hat owing to Mr Hiilcombe/s dee th delay bad arisen in seeding word to difendant of the tenancy he had arranged. By agreement, the question left to the Msgistrat3 to decide was in regard to the firm of Messrs Smith and Ualcombe being authorised to let the property. Alter hearing the evidence ot Mr Smith and . the defendant, the Magistrate said he was bound to accept the defendant's sworn statement that he verbally notified the late Mr Halcombe that the property was s; Id. Under all the circumstances, however, he suggested that both the defendant and Mr Smith Bhould recognise that there was some moral obligation m them jointly to pay tome reasonable sum as compensation for expenses incurred by plaintiff, and in the hore that s me such arrangement would be come to he would defer entenng up judgment until next Court day. CLAIM FOK W A'JES. Mrs HawKe, boardinghouse proprietress, of Pukekohe, was sued by Misb Ura Davidson, now of faint Chevalier, for the sum of £37 3s, said to be due in respect of arrears of wages owing her during the time sha was in Mrs Hawke's employ as a domestic asisstant. Mr P. J. Scantlebury, of Auckland, appeared for plaintiff, and the defendant was represented by Mr W. P. Hopkins. At the cutset of tha case the claim was reduced to £24, of which amount the plaintiff also admitted that Mrs Hawke had paid £2O 4b for her in respect of dre3ses. After hearing evidence, the Magistrate gave judgment for the phiotiff for £2O, which amount was equalised by the money admitted to have been paid by Mrs Hawke on plaintiff's behalf. The defendant, however, was ordered to pay £(3 is, Court costs and witnesses' expenses, the Magistrate remarking that the trouble had been caused by Mis Hawke's failure to keep a wages book wherein payments Khould have been entered and receipted by pli:otiir.