Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

FEILDING COURT.

At Foildiug Oourt this morning before Mr A. D. Thompson, S.M. the case v. Dower was hoard, arising out of an assault at tho Aoraugi Settlement. It appeared that on April 12th the parties met in defendant’s paddock, where a fight ensued, and defendant gave Fanning a severe hammering. Plaintiff stated that JDewer struck the first blow, defendant, however, stated that Fanning began the fighting by striking him in tiro 'face; he then administered a few severe blows and knocked him down. Afterwards he asked plaintiff what was his reason for starting the'row, and plaintiff stated that defendant was tho cuse of tho trouble which existed between him and a man named Oliver. Frederick Jenkins said he saw the fight, but could not say who was the aggressor, as he was too far away. Maria Fanning, plaintiff’s wife, also gave evidence that her husband had been severely used when he re* turned home. She admitted ..that her husband threw stones at defendant as ho passed the house in his paddock. Cross-examined by Mr Trewiu, Dower said ho could not account for Fanning’s manner towards him. Ho had not been the cause of plaintiff leaving tho creamery ; the only tiling he could think of was his friendship for Oliver. The S.M. said that as there was no witness who saw the first blow ho would dismiss the case* but without costs, as ho considered defendant had been too severe in his treatment of plaintiff. Judgment was given for plaintiff in the following undefended cases: — Barraud and Abraham y, G-. H. Thompson, claim £l6 3s lid, costs 80s Cd; Domigau and Co. v. R. O. Maugham, claim £5 10s 7d, costs 33s 6d; Bramwell Bros. v. J. H. J. Bowater, judgment for ' costs, 8s; Atkinson and Co. v. J. F. Adams, claim £ll 18s Id, costs 36s Gd; T. C. Fowler 4v. Burgess,. claim £8 10s, costs 80s 6d; W. A. Bell v. Ridlor, claim £37 10s lid, costs £3; T. A. Potts v. A. Stevenson, claim £5 7» 6d, costs 23s 6d; A. H. Sutton and 00. v. P. Cotterell, claim £2 2s, costs 16s; Domigau and Co. v, H. Wise, claim £5 3s Cd, costs 23s Cd. Judgment summonses : W. J. Porcival T. J. Tapper, ordered to pay £4 13s forthwith or in default five days’ imprisonment.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/RAMA19070522.2.46

Bibliographic details

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXII, Issue 8819, 22 May 1907, Page 2

Word Count
389

FEILDING COURT. Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXII, Issue 8819, 22 May 1907, Page 2

FEILDING COURT. Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXII, Issue 8819, 22 May 1907, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert