RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.
(Before H. M'Culloch, Esq., 8.M.) TtTBSDAT, Atr«UBT 12. C. C. Sproull was charged -with an offence under the 6th clause of tho Railway Offences Act, 1865, in that, he had on Sunday, 13th July la«t, at Forest Hill, obstructed the free passage of the Oreti "Railway by running a trolley along the rails. Mr Sfacionald appeared for defendant, and objected to the information on the ground that the interpretation clause of the Act under which it was laid limited its operation to such railways as were " constructed by any Act of the General Assembly." The facts of the case were, that on the day in question, Mr Sproull, on returning from church, found a drunken man asleep on the line, and obtained a trolley upon which he placed the man and conveyed him along the line to the nearest shed, at which be deposited him, returning the trolley to the place from which it had been taken. His Worship held the objection to be fatal to the information, and dismissed the case. Mr Fox informed the Bench that he had laid the information in accordance with instructions received ' expressly from the Provincial Executive. 1 William Lawrence was charged under the above-mentioned clause with riding his horse upon the railway line on the Sod inst, and upon the application of Mr Fox, the case was withdrawn. Peter Armstrong, under the foregoing clause, was charged with obstructing the free passage of the Invercargill and Bluff Harbor Railway on the 24th July last. Thomas Devally, driver of the engine on the day in question, proved that defendant was drunk upon the line at Sew, and came staggering forward to meet the engine. The train having been brought to " dead slow" as quickly as possible, defendant was barely able to get off the line without being struck by the engine, and nothing but a friendly flax bush saved him from probable death. Defendant admitted being on the line, bat denied that he was drank. His Worship considered the offence proved, and fined defendant 40s, or three days' imprisonment, which defendant elected to take, and went to gaol accordingly. Mitchell c. Cochran and Blackwood.-~Tb.is was a claim for £15 for wrongful conversion by defendants. Mr Harvey appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Wade for defendants. The claim arose out of a sale by the bailiff of the Resident Magistrate's Court, under a distress warrant against • man named Campbell, near to Riverton. Among Campbell's effects, seized by the bailiff, was a bay horse, which Campbell stated belonged to plaintiff, but as he (plaintiff ) had no person there to claim or take possession of it, the bailiff treated it as Campbell's property, and sold it by auction with the other effects seised. The horse was bought by Joseph Wentworth, a clerk of defendants', admittedly on their behalf, for £1. Plaintiff subsequently applied to defendants, stating his claim, and asking to see the horse, which was refused. Having, however, through holes in the stable door, satisfied himself that it was his hone, he applied for the delivery of the animal, when Mr Blackwood declined to give him up. He accounted for the horse being in Camp* bell's charge by stating that he had lent it to kirn for a trip, and it having fallen lame, was kept by Campbell until it was fit to return. By crossexamination it was sought to be established tor the defence that the horse had been given to Campbell, as part payment for a horse which plaintiff had purchased of him. This was, however, denied by plaintiff, who proved that he paid Campbell for the horse which he purchased from him partly in cash, and the remainder by a contra account. His Worship held that plaintuTa property in the horse, and also the conversion, had been clearly proved, and gave judgment for plaintiff for £15, to be reduced to one farthing if the horse were delivered. Mr Wade, on behalf of defendants, pleaded in mitigation of costs that defendants had been compelled to allow the case to be brought into Court that the facts might be brought out, and not with any desire to withhold the property from plaintiff. fib Worship concurring in the propriety of defendants having allowed the case to be tried, gave judgment for costs, £2 2s. Cockrau and Blackwood v. John Campbell, was an interpleader Bummons arising out of the sale under the distress warrant out of which the foregoing case arose. William Campbell (as interpleader) sought to establish \hia claim to the refund of £28 10s which he had paid (under protrst) for two horses and one saddle and bridle, •old by the bailiff, and which he alleged were his property. Mr Wade appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr Harvey for the interpleader. William Campbell proved the purchase of the horses in question, and produced the receipts for payment of the purchase money, stating that he had also a witness to the purchase, and as to the saddle, he had imported it specially from Melbourne. Upon hearing his evidence, Mr Wade, on behalf of plaintiffs, withdrew their claim. Judgment on the question of costs was deferred. Rodie 9. .*>»>«•.— Plaintiff claimed £10 18s 9<i for goods sold and delivered. Judgment was given for the amount, with costs 1 3s. Wbbkssday, AtrcrosT 13. Robert Holme* was charged with vagrancy, and was discharged with a caution.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ST18730815.2.13
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Southland Times, Issue 1780, 15 August 1873, Page 3
Word count
Tapeke kupu
896RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Southland Times, Issue 1780, 15 August 1873, Page 3
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.