RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, TE AROHA. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 26th. (Before H. W. Northeroft, Esq., R.M.)

Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 423, 27 November 1889, Page 2

RESI DENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, TE AROHA. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 26th. (Before H. W. Northcroft, Esq., R.M.)

Duncan E. Clerk \\M. W. 1) O'KeeffV, claim £4 2i 51, for goods supplied. Sir Win. Wasteneys, solicitor, for the plaintiff. No appearance of defendant. Judgment for £4 23 5s I, and costs |8* OJ. W. Hetlirington v. W. Duffy. Th« original claim was for £4 7s 01, valno of a horse, and £] 17s G ), 5 d.iys hiro of same at 7s (5d p»M* day. The horse having bccMi rclurnc 1, however, the claim for £2 10s was abandoned, and the claim for £1 17s Cl pioceeded with. Sir Win. Wasleneys, solicitor, for plaintiff, briefly stated the circumstances of the case, 1-einga claim for £1 17s Gd, f«>r detention of a horse, at 73 (Xl per day. His Worship : What, for a£2 10s horse? Sir W. Wasteneys : For n £2 10s horse, your Worship If your Worship considers the charge- excessive of course we shall have to. accept a lesser amount. The first witness examined was W. Hetheiington, who stated he became possessed of the horse in question, a black gehling 1 , by purchasing it at a Pound sale. Lent it to a Native. Found out afterwards that defendant was in possession of it. Defendant returned the hoise on Nov. Bth, Witness valued the hoise at £2 10s. In reply to Defendant : I received a telegram from you ; but the contents of that telegram were not fulfilled. I also received a letter from you offering me 25s for the horse, By His Worship : I wrote defendant on October 28th to return the horse by October 31st, bat ho did not do so. His Worship : You took our, the summons on the sfch November, the horse was returned on November Bth, and the summons was not, served until the 2'2nd November. Witness : I did not know the horse would be returned at all when I took out the summons. It was no fault of mine that it was not served until the 22nd November. I was told defendant made use of very bad lnn^uaije. I was informed ha said in a public place I stole the horse; that did not look \cry nice for me ; and if it had not been for the language 1 was informed he made use of, and my desire to clear the matter up, this nction might never have been brought by meWin Dufty, the "defendant, stated : He lived at Parawai, Thames. The horse in question was stolen from him at P.ieroa. About two years ago be gave the pony to a brother-in-law of hjs, who lent him to wi«n,e?s to ride up to Paeroa races on 17th March last. He tied tbe horse iTear the wharf at Paeroa the same evening 1 whilst he went to get somo tea, and when he returned the horse was gone. Ho went to, the police about it, but uever saw the horse again until he saw a native woman riding it. He told her it belonged to his brother-in-law, and that she had better leave th,e horse. He did uot take the horse until after he had seeji Sergeant Gillies at Thames, about it" who told him to, keep the hoise until he found ont where, the native woman had got it. Tho, woman in reply to his question said W. Hethrington owned the horse. i\e then wrote a letter to Mr Hethrington about the matter, but got no reply till Ihe 3rd or 4th of November. He then went to see Sergeant Gillies and showed him the

letter?, and by his advice lie sent Mr Hethrington a telegram, and relumed the horse to him the next dny. Never s»»id to the Maori woman, qftorshe said the horse was Mr tfethj-iug^on's, that. " Mr Hethrington must have stolen it." Never accused Mr Hethrington of ing the pony at all ; what he said was that the pony had been stolen fron^ him. Di 1 not know by whom. This closed the case for the plaintiff. J. W. R. Guilding (Poqqdkeeper of Te Arolia), v. Win. I}ufty, claim £1 14s 6d ; balance claimed over and above amount realised by sale of an impounded horse, of which the defendant is alleged to be the owner. Sir W. Wasfeneys, solicitor for j plaintiff, stated the action ivas brought under section 4G, of the Impounding Act, 1884. The impounded horse in question was sold on May Sth last for £1 2s; whilst the expenses, etc., amounted to L 2 10s 6d, and plaintiff now sued to recover the balance. The Poundkeeper obtained an order from Mr J Ilott, J.P., to sell the horse before the statutory time allowed, on the grqrnd that it would not realise the expenses, etc. J. W. R. Guilding, sworn, stated : He was Ponndkeeper at Te Aroha. Remember receiving a notice from a Mr Smythe, re a horse trespassing on the property of Mr Wick, near Paeroa. There wns 7s 6d claimed for damage, and 15s drova^e. Advertised in the Te Aroha and Ohinemuki News that the horse would be sold. Subsequently applied to a Justice of the Peace, who ceitified the provisions of the Act had boon complied with. The costs against the horse were : Poundage, Is ; 11 days sustenance, at 2s Gd, LI 7s C>d ; adveitising, 3s ; notice to the paper, 2s Gd ; diovftgo, 15 miles, at Is, 15s ;Ll 17s 6d; damages 7s Gd were also claimed. Total, L 2 IGs Gd The hoise only realising Ll 2s, Mt a balance of Ll 1-ls Gd still due to him, which amount was still due and owing. The horse btlonge I to Dufty. Sold \.\\e horse on Sth May, to \V. IJethrington. XV. liothrington gave evidence as to purchase of the pony, and stated the defendant lrul given him to understand the pony was his property. This closed the case for plaintiff. His Worship nonsuited plaintiff in both cases ; and in doing so he told plaintiff's solicitor he considered the (U'loiidant, Dufty, had used all reasonable despatch in returning the horse, after he became aware Hetliiinpftpn was its ownei ; in fact a great many people would have firs-t male him piove his title before giving it up. With nspect to the second case, that of the Puundkcepcr's cl.iim, he had not ovon prove 1, on bi'half of pluiniiff, that the ilefendant was the owner of the hnvs > ; on the contrniy it had been statsd in evideiue be w.is not ; that it biilonjed to his brothi»r«in law. Prohibition Ordor : Robert Hill w.is charged on the informal ion of Sei^fan^ Emeison, that he by excessive dunking, wastes and mis-spends his subs.tance,cti\, and niked that a [>rohibiii'>n ordjr miglil be issued, Hill pleade I guilty. Order made piohibitmg al l publican's within the Te 'Vroha and Wailo.i lice us ing di.<'ricts fiom supplying liquor to Robt. IX ill for the space of twelve months.