Resident Magistrate's Court. TE AROHA. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28th. [Before H. W. Northcroft, R.M.]

Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 415, 30 October 1889, Page 2

Resident Magistrate's Court. TE AROHA. TUESDAY, OCTOBER 28th. [Before H. W . Northc roft , R.M.]

Judgment Summons : Menzio v. HolU|. AdHin Menzie against Fre^leinck^ Holfis; clnim £7 4s. 1 ?i? i ; : 5 ,«'^ ;"*. % In reply to Sir Wm. Ay«stne^s, golici^nv who appeared for\p!aintiff,?defendant;,&a?d: I »in a miner resiefrn)? at^WmihiV am nW workingNpYtewagc's for my brother. Wn\. Ilollis, and r&ceivoF'S* a day, and lia # vo t . been in eiu^'oyijient i'oi n little over tW m >nth^,^ iMrnt" H my agreement, but so>faf I have only drawn £7, I Imvo a.'mjjthoi to support. A inttn.yame!l •Ivalplisi^d mo nnd «ot judgment? against me fof ovejt £20. * . , „ i /.& Ordefe'd -to pay^VHlfe^rafe 'of £2 jp^r month, tliQ first p-tyment/to bpMnad^pV Nov. 19th nextl* ,V, **i * ,}, L. -Millett v. J. Hart, clnith £2/IQs ; the sum of iif lOs was paid \rito Court, by defendant iv respect of.tlib hi.-rt item, sweetmeat's. . r " _ s - Leonard Mrllett, sworn. Tam ; a'cookat the P.daee Hotel. On thu^nrf &f August a ball took place at Te Aioh.i, got up by "inc. 1 8a v defendant with respect to the,caterirg for the ball ; and arranged' with him to do so for the sum of 3;£h. couple. He subsequently fold me', however, .that lie cDuld not provide ..table ; 'cloths : 1 therefore undertook to borrow the ,tab l e cloths pro- ' vided ho guaranteed any Iri^s in connection therewith. I chafge 10-rfloftlie us'b of the t.ib'e cloths; I Jmut' 7s \(Jd" fo/ washing' .them and mending and 2>i6d-io' J MV* l Efiert' li'or the hire *of the cloths. pefcvndnnt .■promised to' take "the ' isiblos £o' and from the lial>, but Ihj d^d n*pt do ad I^oVa named Willie Biic^ a,ud t anothor, A «>nntlem.in to.reYiio've thorn. I paid 5s Yd .Bi^gs, and l shouted 'a few times £ov the .gentiemui who as-i^ted. "By Defonihint i, The final nrran^'-mpnt 'wis made in the kitchen of the Hot Springs' Hotel. ■" '. •">*,' : By His Woihlu'p": T p.iid Biggs on 2Gth 'October. - - ; , Hi- Worship :On the very da k y you took out the summons. Frederick Day (sworn) : Tn reply to Sii Wm. W;ixtenu\s : I was piesent, whun tlio 'p|, iin tiff made. ui.miifti'ienti with dclVrKKmt ti) cit^r foi the bill. 1 lemembei (witcs. hi^onitß, lollies, sweatmeat-*. and tnbU' cloths weio to bopunided. The ul.i-^ of tiblc cloth w <)•> not im'nliont'd. The lindnii> of tables w.is not mentioned. ; Bv DefVndanl : I did not henr plaintiiT nay ho would iind'thc table clotln. l?v His Woifihip : I think it was an understood thing Mr llait was to find the ■tables. > Thns. Ailken (sworn), in rcn'v lo dofon-eljint-:-1 i^im'tnbor.Mi MilleLt coming pp to vonr sliop the evening before the ball, and nsk'ne; you what about the table cloths. You said you would find calico table cloths, but Mr Millett would nqt agree to it, and, said he would find LibJe cloths himself, and he and Diy wont away together/ to go and airnnge to bono\v<tLhle cloth^. It is customaiy to use calico for t.ible cloths on such occasions. , . John Halt, sworn : At the final arrange^ nients for the ball referred to, the question aroae who was to find the tables and table cloths ; plaintiff in reply to Mr Day, said, \\q i -would .find them. Mr Day said he thought that f was to find them. Plaintiff' replied no, lie, was going to find them, but did not know s how he would get 'the tables jnp, and 1 then offered to take them up, if 'I was not too busy. , In reply' to Sir Wm'. Wnstneys : Ac-' 1 cording to the agreement I was to be paid '3s a couple, up to 70 couple. The morning after he came in; to, me, said lie was j Isorry the thing was not .that there ;\vere only 36 couple there, but lie would , jpiiy f or 40'cottple. 1 -I at'on'c'e wrote out a ' "list of 55 couple who were, present, nnd as ! I,kne\v.t,her^ w.ero over 60 couple, at the ;ball I charged^ for GO couple. . 1 Geo. ISb«>rt,' sworn, stated: He was 'proprietor of the Palace Hotel! Ke.membere'd the occasion of the ball referred to. Lent Millett the table cloths for the i occasion, and charged him 10a for them 'when returned" On account of damage, etc 1 . Judgment for. plaintiff fo>- 10s (biro of table cloths, etc.), and "costs 13s 6d (solici,tor, 10s Gd ; court fee, 3s). j Collins, v. Booth- W. S. Collins sued 'Fredeiick Booth for 16s lOd, for goods'supplied. Sir Win. Wasteneys, solicitdjr ,'f or plaintiff, "defendant did- not -appear,-, ;J,udgmpnt for 16s'10d and costs, Ll 3n3d. , ' Collins v. Shea ; W. S.Collins.sued Jqh'n 'Shea for'lls, for goods supplied. Sir Wm,. .WaaitenjSy.s, nolicibpr foj- plaintiff. No -xpjpflapce or defendant. .Judgment \foi-., [ v'. McCall ~: Alfl! Cnr'nes, syerjjJ-.j ;lf."McCall 10VL19," yaluelof'a Ahorse (3e-s I tuned,, and hly damages. , ;,,. \ „ /f j I^Sit; Wnu'^asteneys, fqr,pjajn-, ftiffj'Rtated me'h,o;>(e in, quegtiop soldi ] by t!')e''Poundkee^er,>(n'mler ! Section ] tho* t Impounding Act)," who gaye t Cornesj, jtV.c purchaser, an Older tp.got p'os^ossion^t ' but on his going to get the r hoise clefendantf claimed L 5 for damages donp ,03' the horse., "John W. J R. (iuijding, ewo'rn : Jr> reply>' to Sir Wini .Wastney^ staged "': He ,was Ppumlkeeper ,at Te A'r'o'has, On SO4II, September he, received a , nqtipe , from u J, . , Mellp,n ( that he h»d,f\n entire lipi^e running, |)übli(/nb f tice by adfvertiseu!eift r in the Xis A iii)liA '>;> T n ' pii'iN^uaij s tinil , it would' be-, ftyhron pclolicnS^rd.,- • 't , '[^Tn reply 'to lifis Wor.sh'ip^.jLije^wilneqH stated lie did not receive notice in wilting, but verbally fiom Mollon, witJru-jespect the lioi-se'.] ' ' ( . *\ , I In voply to defdndapl, (J. ,R. McCall): T eopl you no uotico, anA did npt,know,an} rthiii" abo'uL j 01^ a L the time the horse. w.as, sokV- " vlflf. Comes, sworn : In roply to Sir \V,fn. Wastncya ptated : I bought the horse r tt f iM led to ut a sale at the Public Pound on October 23rd, lor L 5 Is. Value I

tliejiorse (it LJ,S to L 20,/ . When -,h went> for 'the' horse' L found , ; it Jn defendant's paddock, »nd heVefusedW'aive up poese's-' sion qf the horse, "until paid ,L 5: damages on account of the horse serving a mare last year, the (property defendant, which mare, Avai|, isow in foal, damejback arr'3 p.otui written *notico*fr'om the Poundkeeper to the defendant to give up possession of the v horse, and took three others, with line { to catoh : the liorse. »»X)efendant, however,^ yefrisecl to let us tiike the h'orse,"Tockod 'the *gnie by which we wont in, got a r jfl e an d sat.uprn ti)e fence anr^snidv wo were x hisjprisonei;^ tind, he would sh6ot' life" lfoVse Vither than let us tulfo ' it n\Vhy f 60 we W& to 'leave it. T' would not care to { take l^ss than £19 for the horse.' f claim damages, i.e.,'£s for Joss of feen, thnt n wqj|ld have, resulted from service by the horse as a stallion, arid » £s for the expense of going over with others to get the horse. If I had got the^oVae >F \voh\j\f%^e had to pay tho mfcri^who wenUwitHhme (P. Brady, W. Hyde, Joseph Lynch), £1 each. I have hot, yet paid? them anything, they have not hgked nnjfrliingV 61 , I had no offer from defendant until this morning, when he asked me,jfep go nn(l take* the horsa, as he said he saw he lmd made aTujstake.^-I paid £5 Is for tho horse. _'** ,' +, v ' , ' . In reply to Defend an bk '''I did not make any^ arr.mgeinents to £ay Hyde, Lynch, und'JEJiady. , >*f*S t ' ,'' \By His \\forship : I do not know anything nbpu-t, how the horse is bred. I tingle he is fotir'-yeais old. The distance wo *bad to go is f^ixj. miles. On the first .occas|on I took four- others with me. 'tfrb- MpNeish,' Kelly, HamiH<>nd H^'diiV'tln'd 'Ricfturd 'Kenny. 'Hnirimond Hyde is in my employ. I wruld gi^p him £1 extra for going out foE tj|o horse, not being part of his work. 1 Philip Briidy sv'ornij ntated 'he went out witli Ooinos for th6 L 'horee. He made no ari'angement with Oorncjs as to payment. A. djiv'w pay would be Bs. lie considered tho j/or.^ "worth Ll2 to LI S. By Defendant : The horse wis in a' paddock. by himself vs'lien. ! we went to your p.lace, foY, Jiiirf. H"e got mixed up with several others' that were in tin adjoining fenced pnddock as wo drove tho. home up ;wo gn'loped'tlieni'lill around. There wo'fo' "two grey mares amongst them. Ido not think you had any intention of using tho/rifle for any- other purpose than to sho'ot'tlipjio.rso. ' l ? i '* f £ "'' t p ( Jo\m s worn, ( stated^ 1 had an un.lpok'en itiillloh, about 'three y'ehrs old, running on, his }nnd a short time^igo. Being too wiTd'to drii'o in, rcame'to thoPoundkeoper and t asked him if the horse could bo i»bld under'Secti >n 21 of the Impounding Act without driving him in ?j, He replied ,\ei by udveitising/it ; and fpnid hitn for the co^t'of advertising. X had previously advertised tho hoise as running on my Kind, etc. McCJall is a tenant'of mine, pnd I l)eiieve the borne was running in McU.ill's paddock jit the dutc o£ the sale. The horse is woi lli about LlO.- - liy Defi-ndant : I gave the Poundkeepcr voil).il .uithoiity not wiitten authority to still tliu hois". [am in wjint of a hoiseof tho chis-, myself, I bid £5 lor tho horse, ijeoaiiKp 1 thought he was not woith tmj iiioio with tho risk of ending him. 1 would not consider him a horse iit to put any ohms of mureto If cut and broken in propcjly he wiiuld be worth LlO. I would not way on whose properly the horse w is lunningal the time ho was advertised foi s-ile by the Poundkccper, By Sir Wiri. Wastem-ys : The liorso has not beep iu>od for stud purposes that I know of. '' ' "'*'' This closed the case for the plaintiff. W. J. MoOfill, swoin, in reply to J, K. McCall,3«iid : He knew the horso in question, it h.id covered a m.-ire of hi«?, which was 'in foal arid much depreciated in value in consequence." , He 'i'ribtr noted tho de • fend.mt to. retain possession of the horse unless the damages were paid. John Kobeit McCall, sworn, said : I have acted under my brother's instructions nil through. I have never had nnv notice served on, me at' any time to give up possession of the horse. The notice that was served was served on my brother, the last witness. Was present when, the notice was served on p.y brother. By His 'Worship : I'^Jid offer this mornHng to give up the horse to Cornea, provided he would'take him away without 'putting me to any further expense. By Sir Wrn. Wasteneys : I did read the notice served. My brother seized the horse on account of the -d-miage it had done to his mare,,nnd told me ho would p_<y. me to gjrajse the horse until he could recover damages. His* Worship' The --whole gist of the case I consider turn's on tyhe question '-of |tho due serving of the notice on the Wrier of the property whore the horse was" running,' by the purchaser, of his initention to take 'away the lidrse. By Soction 23, dfl-Impbunding' Act require* that jtwejity-four lidiirs' notice must be given. IL has been clearly shown Comes did- not give tthins n twenty -four hours' notice, in ■fact did not serve" the real owner of the' .property where the horse was running, Mr J', t( li.' M'cCallJ with any such notice 'jit'^alli ' Comes had no right to take lie' had' "served a proper |noti6e','in a'ecbrdrfnee with I ' the provisions jof the 'Itnpbundihg Act; 'on the owner of the property on which' the horse ,is running.' In anj 1 " case' Oor'nes could not !claim l 'e'xpensesfdrthe'nlc^"Tift;;'6-'d cc < v cort he icHrtVe^to take out with him *oiV the' first becMRe 1 ' 1 tlic • 'neeVasjify tWontj'' {four hours notice WduTd'"n'dt ! hnt'fe'^be'en'' 'given at that time, even if the notice had IbVon served on the fight party. "Plaintiff : would be ryin suited. * * V \ V ;'. '. j r^Qo^UTTIEb EOIC ©ONTfeMPT OF,.COURT, > u t Geo. Edgecumb v. Robt. Mtickie (judgment smnmpns,,Llo 2s). ' ,"'.'<' * % : -^Before the, cusejwas, proceeded withih'e defendant, R, Maqkie, addressing Ilisj l Vorship, said the summons referred to »one.il/ac/b7/, that was not his name which , wns Mackie, and he was not tl\e party. 1 If _ a judgment had been got against him it musl. have been by falno sweaiing. ■' ; Hitj»Wossbip, ad,dro-*sing defendant, §aid [no clerical error or misnomer would avail r :iK nn .excuse, prpyided he v/as the party iefeire<l tq. i On bpina sworn defendant said his name ; was Robert M ackic, , and he resided. at ; r J,e .Aroha. In reply to the plaintiff! question, aM to;wl)etl«er lie had sold any cattle lately to Sir John.Woads, witness most poaitively refunod to answer the question, although repeatedly warned by His Worship lie must do so. He was therefore placed under arrest, and comquitted to the lock-un lor contempt of

Court, and there kept till the I concjusipn. l of j all tlio other- Uttaincss, On bcH'ng 'released in the nf terSVoonj %nd a<*nin cnutioried by' Hi« Worship, witness, in reply to pluintiff, said : I did 8611 some cattle to .John Wood for the stun of, 'L2gV« Mr W^oqcfgave me a cheeps the 1 ainbiint, which' I, csished at the bimk^, £6t the."' money and gave him a receipt, signed Robert Mackie. The, cattle, however, wore not mine. John 3 Wppd, ¥ :: f Ji\jop}y to plaintiff. „ I purchased sdrne Ciitte^irom detonnnnt on v or about Jitly 9th 1 , for' which I got a receipt from him. The receipt is the '<\no, I »now, produce. ..This wds the case I for plaintiff. ' ' .'*'■' v * v For the- Defence Robert- Maokie oaid ; The owner of the cattle was Mrs Mackie, and I sold them for' her and by her instructions, * His Worship tlien gave , judgment as fallows: "Ordered to paj' the whole amount forthwith, or in default two months imprisonment . in Mount Eden Gtiol. defendant having the means to pay."' ' ' , ' • This concluded the Court business.