RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, TEMUKA

Temuka Leader, Volume 2, Issue 138, 19 April 1879, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, TEMUKA

Wednesday, April 16. [Before A. LeG. Campbell, Esq., R.M.] David Farqnharson. on tho application of Ids wife, was bound over to keep the peace for six months, himself in £SO, and two sureties of £25 each. Mr Johnston applied on behalf of the Trustees in the Estate of A. Wadsworth, a bankrupt, for a temporary transfer of the license of the Orari Hotel to Hugo Brosnahan. Tho application was granted. CIVIL C AS KS. Inwood, Eros. v. W. Eagleston—-Claim 17s. Judgment for plaintiff by default. Temnka Hoad Board v. John CamClaim 9s, for rates Judgment for plaintiffs by default. Ackroyd and Whitehead v. Ha pi (Native) —Claim £lO, on judgment summons. The defendant, was ordered to pay £1 per month, in default one month’s imprisonment. Temnka Hoad Board v. James Mutch— Claim £8 15s. Mr White appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr Johnston for the defendant. Mr White stated that it was not for the Road Board to enter upon the case, as it rested with the defendant to prove the non-service of the demand foi rates. A rather warm scene then took place between the solicitors, Mr White stating that he would have to ask his Worship to keep order in tho Cou rt, if it was possible to do so while Mr Johnston was present. He then proceeded to quote authorities bearing upon re-hearings. Mr Johnston protested against the question of the re-hearing being opened, as it had already been granted, and his Worship could not now say that he would not bear the case. His Worship decided that it rested with the plaintiffs to open the case. Mr White then called Win. Wills, who stated that he was clerk and collector to the Temalca Road Board, and had posted a notice to tho defendant to pay the amount claimed about a fortnight before live summons was taken out. No attention had been paid to that notice by the defendant. The claim was for rates duo in 1877. By Mr Johnston: I have no copy of the notice ; it is not usual to keep conics. H. D. Miicphcrson disposed that he bad seen the defendant about the rate shortly after it became duo, and lie had said “ All right.” He had had a notice of bis valuation, and ho did not appeal to the Assessment Court. By Mr Johnston; He could, not swear that Hie defendant had a notice demanding the rate, but believed that he had one left at his house. Council having addressed the Benqh, his Worship said he did not see anything in the fresh evidence which would lead him to reverse his decision. Judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed and cosls. J. Mondclson v. J. Cooper—Claim £sl (is lOd Mr White appeared for tho defendant. Judgment was given for the plaintiff with costs. W. Hay v. D. Leach.—Claim £4 3s. Mir White, who appeared for plaintiff, said that tho plaintiff had agreed with" the defendant to purchase an acre of land with a house ; and after certain sums had been paid the defendant was offered tho balance, but he would not take it. Some time after that tho defend ant went to tho phii tiff’s house, and asked to see the agreement and receipts, which were handed to him ; and not being allowed to leave tho place with them, lie gave the receipts back, but tore up the agreement into pieces. The plaintiff therefore claimed a. return of the money paid, Wm. Hay desposed to the facts as stated by Air White. Cross-examination by the defendant ;

I was along-side of you when yon tore tlie agreement up. lam twenty-one next July. Tfie agreement was drawn up in 1877. Mr White, at this stage, applied for leave to withdraw the case, as it appeared that the plaintiff is a minor. The case was withdrawn.