R.M. COURT, TEMUKA.

Temuka Leader, Issue 224, 15 January 1880, Page 2

R.M. COURT, TEMUKA.

Bbforb§F. Gutiwjbss, Esq., R.M. '" m Wednesday, 14tu Jan.. 1880. The Court Rat at 10 a m. OKUNK AND DISORDERLY. John Murphy and John Bai nett for this offence were dismissed with a c;iufc : on. BREACH OF PUBLICHOUSB ORDINANCE. Leonard Tombs was charged with having on the 28fch of .December last supplied to one Walter Long one gloss of beer, it being a Sunday, and n resident of the town. , Mr White appeared for the defence ; Sergeant Carlyon conducted the prosecution. Tho facts ,of the case camo out last Court day, but, owing to the information being faulty, it whs dismissed, and a fresh one liid. On the charge being read, Mr White submitted that the defendant Bhould net bo called upon" to plead guilty, or no* guilty, and quoted authorities in; support of the.. Bsmie;,-....~„ ... :: _..

His Wdrshipßaid that, as the dismissal had been given on the grounds of tlie information being insufficient, and not on the merits of the caso, he could not refufle to hear the case again. The accused pleuded not guilty. The evidence, which was s : milar to that given last Court day was taken.

Mr White then addressed the Court at considerablelengch. He relied on the evidence of the witness Long, who said ho did not pay for the beer received, and that as far as the evidence before tho Court was concerned, and tho fact that Tombs had refused payment, it could not be consideredofchsrwise than a gift, and it wag not intehdod thftt the Act should prevent a piiblicfJr/lrom supplying his gnosis who might visit him on a Sunday. ,! ''"■■ His Worship, in Humming tip, said he would have to outer up a conviction but would not, under the circumstances, inflict a penalty. He was satisfied that hitherto Mr Tombs had conducted his business in a very careful manner, and did not think that he had any intontion of infringing the law in this instance. BRACK OF TUBUIO WOiUCS ACT. George Dyson wi>.a charged by tho police with allowing one cow to w&idor upon the railway lino Defendant admitted the offence. His Worship romaiked that this was an offence which was becoming vary ooin.mcti] here, and it was also a very dangerous one to.'.tho travelling public, and would therefore. Infljot' a tine of L 5.

Tho Court then adjourned till 12-30.

On tho Court resuming Mr Dyson said ho wished to make a statement with regard to the previous case.

Ho biiid he was not In a position to bear the heavy penalty inflicted by the Court. He was away valuing for tho ratopnyen. roll when tho offence wos committed. His chlldron generally looked after tho cow, but were almotifc at tho childrons' treat at the time the cow got away. In answer to the Bench, he said ho had been once charged with a similar offence before.

Mr Johnston voluntarily stated to the Court that-ho lived near the defendant, and could assnr« His Worship that every care .was used by him in looking after his cow.", and folt assured that the present case was one"of puro accident.

His Worship raid that undor the ciroum3tances he would reduce the fine to L2 10s, including costs. He ootid not make any further reduction as the accused had been up "nee before on a similar charge. Ho made the reduction purely on the statement of Mr Johnston, Imt it was not to be taken as a precedent, as he was determined to inflict the fullest penally the forfuturethe law allowed. Cliff vCain—Lß 3s.

This was a case brought by the plaintiff •c ••«ignee of the book debts of one 0. Oldfiold.

Mr Austin for plaintiff and Mr White for defendant.

His Worship reserved his decision from last Court day, and now gave it as follows : —-

The quention was. whether the deed of asignment produced sufficiently asigned the book debts in question. He had gone over the deed very carefully and come to the conclu«iontthat it wasjtho judgment of the Court would then be for the plaintiff for full atnoun t and coats. TRANSFER OF LICENSE. An application was made for the transfer of the Caledonian Hotel, Temiika, from Mr Bartley to Mr Fenton. Mr Purnell appeared for Mr Fenton, and Mr Johnston appeared in the Interest of the alleged transferrer. Mr Johnston objected to the case being proceeded with, as he was in a position to prove that his client had not given his consent to the transfer.

His Worship : I hold an application signed by Bartley for the transfer.

Mr Johnston—l am instructed to state that if such is the ca6e, it is a forgery and must protest against tho transfer being made-

His Worship—B rtley should be here. Mr "Johnston—l am prepared to send for him. (A constable was despatched accordingly.) His Worship- There is nothing before me but a document purporting to be signed by Bartley, and unless this is proved a forgery, I cannot go beyond the document. Mr Johnston submitted that the original liconso Bhould bo in Court, and the transfer endorsed thereon, but the 'document being in his safe, there it would remain until taken by the strong arm of the law, unless ho was butter instructed than he was at present.

Mr Purnell submitted that Bartley war* merely a nominal holder. Mr Johnston objected to outside evi dente.

His Worshiper I shall have to allow considerable latitude in this case.

At this stage, Bartley appeared, and was sworn.

By Mr Purnell—l have never seen the documents produced. Tho signature, Jiio. William Bartloy, is not my handwriting. By the Court—That is not my handwriting. (Witness here appeared to be very uncertain, and afterwards admitted that it was.

By Mr PurnelJ —The duplicate application 11 as a Bignature like my own, but cannot say it is, nor will I swear it ie not. t Bythe Court—lf that is my signature, it was written before the body of the document was filled in.

By Mr Purnell : I did not Bee it ;fi!led" up. The hund writing appeal's to be that of Mr Innes the owner of the house. I was malinger of the house for Mr Innes lip to the 7th November last, when I took it over into my hands, t was manager at the time the license was temporarily transferred. The license ia in Mr Johnston's keeping. He rofusod to produce the license ; he did so on the ndvico of his soUcitor ; I got the temporary license on Mr Innes' behalf; I got the original license some time after the lOfcli Dec. ; I did not pay for tho original transfer. By Mr Johnson: Since tho permanent transfer was granted to me I have been a tennunt of Mr Iniiess'; I have been paying Ll2 per week forhouso and fnrnituie and Ll2 per woek to pay off the stock that was in the house when I took it ; 1 made this arrangement with Mr Imies on tho 7th Nov., aiK l made tho Ist payment about the 28th November; I]havo not recoivod any notice from Mr luues to terminate that agieomont. Mr Purnell hero remnrkod that the evidence was very irregular.

Mr Johnston said everything was irregular when it did not Bint his application. His Honor : Of oourße that ia the rule.

By Mr Johnston: The document I signed was blank ; Fonton's name wns not there ; I did not know tho nature of the document I signed. 1 believed it was something in connection with my then transfer.

Franoiß Inrtea, bvewor Christehiirch, sworn deposed : The two signatures on the documents produced are Bartloy's ; I told him they were for use, in ease of a disturbance at the oud of the time, and ho signed them without any hesitation ; I put him in as mauagot ; I afterwords told him lie could have the place as he has elated, but was to pay for all goods ho received from mo in cash ; ho haß paid mo no money for rent; ho sent mo tho takings, deducting L2 per wook for his wages ; the license was transferred from Miss BroMiahim to him on my bohalf j I paid all foes ; I askod him for tho license last but he refnaed to give it me; I made no arrangement, ouly suggested on Nov. 7 what X have boforp stated, but it was never carried- out, as Bwtley said lie was not ablo to do it. This concluded the evidonco

His Worship said it was a question whether Bartley signed tho application or not; he boliovod ho did, jib Junes iweara ho did, and told him tho use it was to be put to, and ho would therefore order that tho application bo granted.