RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT. UNKNOWN Tuesday, May 12, 1885.

Te Aroha News, Volume II, Issue 102, 16 May 1885, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT. UNKNOWN Tuesday, May 12, 1885.

•'" ' <r Criminal Calses. " t '■/'.'! J^^iceTv. Wm. Lincoln, charge*! with! einj^djjnnk on- streets of Te Aroha on April : 29bb. , ' ' '" The, charge being proven,- defendant, was fined '5s or 48 hoars' imprisonment. | Emerson applied For a prohibition order, i tcf be issueTlr^tli^SaH^jit^^^^iant^ who it was stated fw& vfaltirfg his earn| k ings ami greatly * injuring his heal'tlr through excessive drjS^flf&lfc^iO'Ol j Sergeant Emerson gave evideape^to. the effect that tor the ,past two or three ykr^d^e^raV^haa'^een^^rven^to-e^^' cfes^ive '"'d'rinlcrn^' an^. 1 had Bls6 l hefe)i'' cpnvicte(r j farihg'''tllat n^e-noa' Several' t|meB for the offence. ' „j- '.r-' '"'■ il^All licensed publicans witiu'n Hie district/df T^' •Arolia^ah'd,KWT H it6^ f*6ni. supplying' - liquor to the defendant for' 1 tHe space of. 12 months.

\ Civil Casep. i Tho3. F.'Fcmftbn v. Bernard' Montague; jdr W. McG. Hay, solicitor/Ifor.riplaih-, £iff. Claim £i 5s amount of a dividendon 50 OolonistfGold Mining s'hares.sQlaV, | Tuephargesetout,was tliaton life 22n^ j (Feb., I£B4. purchased from defendant 50 shares in the Colonist Gold Mining ' Company r and received) a* 'tVans I**1 ** fer,<in due, course, •• whjqh, hpwever, he* Jield over for about a month, after wnich it could not be registered. Plaintiff therefore obtained a fres"h transfer/ \ In the meantime, however ? a^ dividend of 6d per share was declared.' viz.] on April" 3rd. - Daf,e ) tt(tent<gave l an prder »to > a merchant in Auckland to draw this dividend. " : .IM ' '• '".:ji:,'» "i Thps. F." Fenton, sworn : Aboot the end pf February lc*B4 I' bougbV&(Kdf( defendant's shares in the^Colonißt Gold Mining Col Tdio 1 n'bVseV tb'e transfer ■for some time after' "l bought them. When I didget'tli^traiisfer Tt r wai f nearly a-itianth^afterwa)rds;,,andjj*l sent ! it on to town at once~to be registered. i I received afybadk;agaln r ,rasjit- required [renewing. Asked- defendant to give me | a fresh fcratas&r^.tJlis^Jbej did,- , In^the I meantime, a dividend vT pf 6d per share had been declared. '* Y1"Y 1 " asked defendant to give me an, order |pr thi^ divic|en<jl on the legal 'manager for the w numoer' of shares I had p'urclYaseU'frAm him. He told me he had given atf order to a merchant in town -to draw -the- dividend, 1 having other aKares \\\ the LColbnis't, Jb"M said he would give me the amount ano^ier time, as he had.no silver vaboaljj-iiHn. i asked him for it a few months later on, when he asrain said'he"Thad no change. The last time I asked him, for it he told me to go to a 'warm 'place! !'■ " l In reply to defendant,: I b,ou^httbese shares last February twelve months. In reply- to. Jlis Worsjiip :; 1 „b,ough t the shared from Mr E. X Cooper \ sharebroker^ defendant' being- the.seller," and I paid the motuvjr to Mr Saunders, of Auckland, to pay : Mr Co6per.^ InTe'ply to" defendant* pTatn'tiff "saul defendant did not tell him "when he promised jbo. renew the. transfer, { that, he, should fine 1 him ihe' amount of tlVe dividend, because it was<hi9 own neglect that! necessitated a fresh transfer bein^ given., Bernard" Montague, s-wo'rn^ Isold the' last of my Colonist shares in October twelve muhlhs to Mr K/'G. Macky, shareb/oker, and got paid tor them. Ali<put Christinas ( fp}iowin/| Mf E. X.; Cooper "asiied, mel for a fresh transfer for; .those 5() sharers, and I gave him .onei In February plaintiff cajine nndrappeafed to my.houour to give him>' another lraus« fer, he having bought the shares, 1 said, No. that J' would, not give any further froVh transfers'. ' He 'appealed to s me*'«ftitltnm)cl"a?rai<rttr i do si>r an 1 1' :vr I Vst I said I would for this once, but should forfeit him Uie dividend far his carelessness - * , x t • > * % kp\si!o]yS)r Hay I }Wlfe\i*pl&ntiff asked mo for a. fresh transfer, I distinctly refused it. Never g.we any merchant an order for any dividend I drew the dividend myself. , I had not drawn it when plaintiff spoke to me about the fresh transfer. I drew the dividend after I gave plaintiff another transfer, and the understanding was that I should retain ".the dividend. Ip.wpuljl not have, given him the transfer otherwise, as by plaintiff's neglect to register I -was liable for calls us well as divi dends. The dividend was sent to me to Waiorongomai post-office on my appli cation. ,, t , , ' His Worship, in^ giving juilgraeni in this case, remarked that any person signing aiJ>lank*,ti > Hnsfer I \of [shares rei|~ defred themselves liable to a 'mo of not lestf 'fliari'^O $r} mdir^ tliaii -6100. % to the t'ime'iliH ( t t defendanli v gaveJthe la^t, ti'arisfer 3|^e £bares_ were siiiU^actuall} his, £ t|ajb|isv|qn^| l|e{gave whireon , .J&io , names pf v both, .purchaser am seller, had,, befn,fille,d in., as require*! by 1 ofw . "' , t|^e ? |vid,enpe^ ad d uced , 1 1 appeared' tlift^|t||is "occurred in April., Plaintfiff, w.ouid,.,tliejefore, ( , be. .nonsuited, with costa of Court, and 8s value of one dayis wapa, k , jyfeh be^jalWdd' His^^shii^.sev.erelyi genthrougli not having the.p^h%er^' duly eii'tered in accordance >Yita l^the ; __rj)V >pds^upnjied^ro^|gi^ ;