MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, 31 October 1917, Page 7

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

YESTERDAY'S SITTING A sitting of the Magistrate's Court was held before Mr. A. Crooke. S.M., yesterday morning. Judgment by default was given for the plaintiffs in the following civil eases:—Harry Norman Hoby (Mr. D. Hutchen) v. Thomas Goulton, £a (costs £.l Is Gel); and E. S.'Rundle (Mr. A. H. Johnstone) v. W. E. Clarke, £4 (costs 1.45). The hearing of the action, John A. Neilson (Mr/R. C. Hughes) v. William Kinsella, in which the plaintiff sued for, £2O 4s, the amount owing for house rent, and which was adjourned from last week, was continued.

The defendant produced receipts and papers to prove that his weekly expenses amounted to about £2 14s per week.

His Worship pointed out that he must therefore 1)e paying out more than he earned, as he made a statement last week that his earnings were about £2 I<)h. The defendant replied that for the last six months he had averaged rather higher earnings, just under £3. He did not earn more than £3 Os 6d at any time.

In answer to the Magistrate the defendant said that the weekly expenses of £2 14s per week did not include clothing and boots, which had to be provided, for after household necessities and rent were met. His eldest child was ten years of age. The debt in question had been contracted while he was doing outside work in the Eltham district, when his wages were often not 30s a wee'k. 'ln answer to .the Magistrate, Mr. Hughes said that the expenditure showed no extravagance. Re-examined, the defendant admitted he was not a teetotaller, but denied having been frequently seen carrying home Iwer from the Red House Hotel.

| To the Magistrate: When I drink beer I do not pay for it. I "Very like your billiard playing," remarked his Worship. The Magistrate said that he was satisfied that the defendant was not in a [position to pay anything off the amount owing and provide for his family of four children and a wife in the face of the greatly increased cost of household essentials, clothing and footwear, and no older would be made.

RAHOTU DAIRY CASE. Deferred judgment was given in the ease Paul Willcox, junior (Roy and Nicholson) v. Raliotu Co-Operative Dairy Company, Ltd. (A. H. Johnstone) wherein the plaintiff claimed the sum of £.' i 12s 7d, the balance owing on buttcrfat supplied. The plaintiff claimed that he was entitled to the balance referred to by virtue of a clause in the company's articles of association. The defendant set up two defences, first, that tho milk supplied by the plaintiff was second gTade milk, sold outright to the company at lfld per lb butter-fat, and tluit no balance was therefore payable; secondly, that the articles of association regulate ; the relations between the company and |the shareholders as shareholders but do not regulate the relations between the company and a mere vendor or supplier of milk even though such vendor be also a shareholder.

' His Worship held that there was not sufficient evidence to establish that plaintiff agreed to sell outright at lod and that if he were entitled to sue in the articles of association he would succeed in Ws claim. His Worship, however, held further that the second defence raised on behalf of the company was [sound, and he therefore gave judgment for the defendant with £1 Is costs. No witnesses' expenses were allowed, as the defendant failed 1n the defence which the witnesses were called to substantiate.