MAGISTRATES COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 356, 6 April 1910, Page 2

MAGISTRATES COURT.

CIVIL BUSINESS. At the regular weekly sitting of the Magistrate's Court for civil business Mr. H. S. Fitzherbert, S.M., was on the Bench. There was a very light list.

MATTHEWS v. CALVERT. His Worship had arranged to deliver judgment in the case of Frank Matthews v. U. W, Calvert, of Strathmore, in which Matthews claimed from the defendant £ll damages for wrongfully refusing to employ the plaintiff," aad '£2 9s 8d travelling expenses between 2\'ew Plymouth and Strathmore. The defence set up was that the plaintiff wa« under the influence of liquor when he arrived, and that he was refused employment on that ground. Mr. Hutchen now applied to the Magistrate to exercise power to allow him to call fresh evidence. The witnesses he now proposed to call were Mr. C. J. Wylie, the coach proprietor, who rode in the coach with the plaintiff, and Mr Backhouse, a hoardingnouse-keeper at' Strathmore. The first of these could disprove the allegation that the plaintiff consumed liquor in the coach. He had not called Wylie before, as he thought the defence would have produced him. Mr. Thompson, representing Messrs Spence and Stanford, counsel for defendants, opposed the application. The Magistrate, however, said it was open for him to admit evidence at any time prior to judgment being given, and his duty to arrive at' the truth in regard to suits before the Court, not to allow either side to "snap" a judgment. He -would grant the application. Mr. Thompson said this was going to have the effect of piling up the expenses, for the defence could bring a dozen men to prove the plaintiff's intoxication, and would now be compelled to bring them in from Strathmore. The Magistrate informed Mr. Thompson that he had not, in re-opening the c«s>e, given permission for counsel to call a host of witnesses, many of whom might give irrelevant evidence. Mr. Hutchen had named the witnesses whom he intended to call, and given an indication of what they were to be asked to: prove. The other side must adopt this method, too, and then he would sav! whether the evidence proposed to be! called should be admitted. !

The case was adjourned for a fortnight.

CIVIL CASES. Judgment for plaintiffs in default of defendant* was entered in the following cases:—New Zealand Express Co. (Mr. Roy) v. Adam Lvle McKee, claim Vi and costs £1 4s;' Dr. H. A. MeCMand (Mr. F. E. Wilson) v. Alfred Cadman. claim £4 lis 6d, and costs 13s; Wood and Zemlm v. John F. Reece, claim £4 3s 7d, and costs ss.