STRATFORD.

Taranaki Daily News, 25 May 1918, Page 3

STRATFORD.

(From Our Own Correspondent ) [All communications, letters, etc., left with Mr. H. J. Hopkins-, bookseller, will receive prompt attention.] t Stratford, May 31. S.M. COURT. Tlie usual fortnightly sitting of the S M. Court was held this morning before Mr. W. 11. Haselden, S.M- Judgment for plaintiff was given in the following cases: —A. 11. Hillock (Mr. Wright) v. Jas. Davidson, £3 15s (judgment for £2 las, costs 10s); Loan and Mercantile Co. v. Jas. Yandle, £C l'2s (18s); F. E. Dobson (Mr. Rutherford), v. W. iH. H. Young, . £C3 16s (£4-ss); W. A. O'Wallaran v. Y. F, and A. 11. Fever, £22 (judgment fo* £l4, 3s <id); T. L. Paget (Mr. Buthcrford) v. P.-Clifton, £3 (10s); Stratford Loan and Deposit Co. (Mr. Wright) v. Alf. Richafrds, £43 .'is 9d (£2 14s); F. Lane v. Jacob Faine, £3 6s fid (ss); P. C. Price (Mr. Wright) v. W. Brown, £4 8s 3d (10s); ST. E. Riddell ('Mr. Rutherford) v. A. IC. M'Lean, £l2 18s (£2 18s Gd); G. T, Walters (Mr. Thomson) v. Eileen Low, £3 17s 3d (lis).

In the judgment summons ease, Harkness and 00. (Mr. Wright) v. William Starrock, £ll 10s, defendant was ordered to pay £l2 forthwith, in default 11 days' imprisonment, the order to be suspended as long as the debtor pays £1 per month. BREACHES OF LICENSING ACT. T. A. Sullivan (Mr. King) was charged with selling beer to Robert Sleep, on April 25, at a time when the premises were required to be dosed- Sergeant Dale said there was no excuse for Sullivan. There had been previous case against him, and fines from £1 to £i had Ibeen inflicted. A fine of £5 was inflicted, costs 7s. T. A. Sullivan was also charged with having delayed admitting the police, on demand, on April 25. A plea of guilty was entered. Fined £4, costs 7sA plea of not guilty was entered William Gorhey, linesman, Eltham, on a charge of being found on licensed premises on April 25. Defendant said 'lie was at Stratford on April 25, and intended to stay for the evening. lie had no luggage, Ibut asked for Mr. SulUvr.n, so that he could bdok a bed. Went to the bar to see him, and was told he could have a lied. Whilst there the police came in. Sullivan put defendant out of a side door into the right-of-wa\i The Magistrate dismissed tlhe information.

E. A. Lee pleaded guilty to 'being found on the Cfluib Hotel premises when thev were required to be closed- Fined 10s* and costs (7s). Robert Sleep, also charged with being on the premises at the same time, was fined a similar amount.

John Jackson, farmer Tariki, was fined 5s and coats (7s) for driving a gig without lights, as the result of wfoich a collision occurred between two vehicles. F. H- Barnett was fined 15s and cost* (7s) for permitting cattle to wander. RESERVED JUDGMENT. The S.M. gave his reserved decision in the case of F. Stott (Mr. J. R. Stanford) v. A. W. Reid (Mr. A- H. JohnI stone), a claim for £4l 15s 9d, as follows:—Defendant admits that the amount would be due to plaintiff under the agreement, but alleges that tho amount was, by mut.ua'. consent, deducted in an account between the two parties- Under the agreement, Stott was bound to do certain work upon the farm, and failing to perform this obligation, the matter was referred to Mr. Crow, to ascertain the amount the defendant was entitled to as damages for such non-performance. Mr. Crow assessed the damage at £4l 15s 9d, whilst there was a sum of 9s lOd due to Stott for his share of milk, and, having deducted £44 Ms 9d, Reid gave Stott a for the difference between thift iTd £52 9s lOd. This was made on September 25, lSd", Stott having left on May 10. On February 23, ISIB. when a bonus had ibeen paid, Eeid paid Stott the full amount thereof, £lO 2s. Plaintiff then complained of Crow's valuation, and said it w«s very hard on him, and on February 23, 1918, demanded £4l 15s ftd- Stott claimed he was at a disadvantage, in that Reid accompanied Crow when the latter inspected the farm. Plaintiff docs not appear to have put his side of the case before Crow, but he could have done so had he chosen. Unfortunately, Mr. Crow was not calleil as a witness. Stott does not appear to have made any objection to the method in which Crow made the valuation. The evidence* seems conclusive that plaintiff accepted Crow's estimate, and accepted a payment based on that estimate, making no objection until five montfhs afterwards. The time has gone by for any valuation to ibe made of the work, which ought to have been done. Judgment would be for defendant, with costs ( £2 7s).

The long -winter evenings are to handSo those who find time tedious will be pleased to learn that Mr. C. E. James has just opened up some fine winter pastimes—games that will instruct the child and interest the parent. Those who enjoy a good book can obtain great variety here, whilst if in search of a holiday, wedding, or christening gift, you will certainly find same amongst the many thousands of articles on sale at C. E. James's warehouse.—Advt.