MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, 10 February 1922, Page 2

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

■NEW PLYMOUTH SITTING. UNDEFENDED OASES. There was a short sitting of the New Plymouth Magistrate’s Court yesterday, Mr. A. M. Mowlem, S.M., presiding. Judgment for plaintiff by default was giyen in the following cases:—E. J. Woodward v. N.Z. Motor Wrecking Co., £3O, costs £3 Ils; A. E. Surrey v. Bert Standring, £1 10s 6d, costs 10s; George Buck v. Frederick G. Smith, £4, costs £1 Ils 6d; Newton King, Ltd., v. Rerehori, claim for costs 6/-; Henry Maddock v. W. Yardley, £l6 19s 4d, costs C2 14s. Orders on judgment summonses were made as follows: —A. J. Hill wa’s ordered to pay Roy J. Deare the sum of £6 18s forthwith, jn default seven days’ imprisonment, warrant to be suspended till seven days after service of order. At the suit of Hallenstein Bros., E. Clark was ordered to pay £8 15s, in default ten days’ imprisonment, order to be suspended for seven days after service; Robert Bowie was ordered to pay Purser’s, Ltd., £l3 lOe, in default fourteen days’ imprisonment, warrant to be suspended till fourteen days after ser-. vice of order. ARREARS OF MAINTENANCE. With £251 of arrears, William Henderson was charged with failing to comply with a maintenance order. Mr. C. H. Croker appeared for complainant. In reply to a question from the Bench defendant said he was evidently being asked to pay for a woman from whom he was divorced.

For complainant, Mr. Croker stated that the order wa.s made in 191 - De-

fendant later disappeared, and an endeavor was made to serve him with a summons. This was not accomplished, and an order for Henderson's arrest was applied for. Defendant sishsequently served three months’ imprisonment for being in arrears, stating that he was going to “take it out” before he would pay. He had persisted in this attitude. He could earn good wages, but “loafed” part of hifi time. There was no claim for maintenance for the wife since the date of the divorce, the amounts being in respect of two children. Henderson replied that the claim was a matter of persecution; it was not a matter of necessity. He had not been able to contribute anything during the last year owing to -broken time in the freezing industry. He had never “loafed.”

Asked jvhat he was going to do about the arrears, defendant said he had had hard luck ever since he had been married. Now that he knew that the money was going to the children he was quite willing that an attachment order for £2 a week be made on his pay. He said the statements made against him were a tissue of falsehoods, and everything to make him look a blackguard. The order was made in accordance with the defendant’s order, £1 per . week to be devoted to arrears and £1 for current maintenance. His Worship asked that the amount be checked, as ho was not sure ‘the figures were correct. “DISGRACEFUL CONDITIONS.” “I don’t know that such another place exists in New Zealand,” said a witness in the tenement case in which Newton King, Ltd., claimed possession of a tenement from Lars Francis Keenan. Mr. R. H. Quilliam appeared for plaintiff. Counsel said that the building occupied >hy Keenan was the upstairs portion of the old Drill Hall. Defendant had gone in and taken possession of his own aceord about August, 1920. He had been there ever since, though the company had tried every legitimate means to get

him out. No claim had been made for rent, as the firm would not put itself in the position of accepting rent for such accommodation. The condition of affairs under which Keenan and his family lived were simply counsel said, and it was extraordinary that they should exist in a town like New Plymouth. The family consisted of defendant and his wife and some children, the number varying according to how many were in the industrial school. Evidence was given by William Healy, a director of Newton King, Ltd., who said the firm required the building for a store. At present it was not fit for a dog to live in, as the floor was rotten and the roof leaked. The firm intended to effect repairs, but couid not do so while the tenants were there.

His Worship ordered that possession •be given by February 25.