R.M. COURT, TEMUKA.

Temuka Leader, Issue 235, 12 February 1880, Page 2

R.M. COURT, TEMUKA.

Before F. Guinness, Esq., R.M. Wednesday, 11th Ftb. 188 - The Court sat at 10 a m. DRUNK AND DISORDERLY. Panial Monaghan, for this offence, was fined 40s, or 48 hours’ imprisonment. Tho nas Morrison, for a like offence, was fined 40?j-or4B hours’ imprisonment ; and for resisting the police, was fined in a further sum of 40s, or 48 hours’ imprisonment.' Thomas Andtr cn, also charged for being drunk and disorderly, was finedTOs and cost?, it being his first, offence. His Worship - remarked that drunkenness was becoming very common here, and he would inflict a heavy penalty for the future. The charge against Dnwber, for shooting with intent, was adjourned .till next Court day, the prosecutor'bring still unable to attend. James Cain, charged wiih riding at a furious-pace thr mgh a pubic tho oughfare. thereby endangering the lives of the public, was fined 50s and cosls. RDY GROG SEEDING. PoPco v. Lisbon.—Mr Godly appeared for the accused, and Mi Hrmersley on behalf ofthe.Licensed Victuallers’ Association. A certificate from Dr Gumming of accused being unable to at rend through i'lness being produced. Pis Worship adjourned the case till next Court day. CIVIL CASES. N. C.. Nicholas v. Janies Reid.—Claim £4 19s 6d. —Mr Johnsren for pjamt'ff. Judgment for full amount and coals. Clinch and L l oyd v McPherson. —Claim £2l 19s 2d, on piomissory dote and intei'cftt, Jndgraent for fidl amount and costs. Baxter Bros, v Nixon.—Claim £lO, being half of boundaiy fi nee bet\yeen nlaintiff s and defendant's. Mr Hamers! *y for plaintiff and Mr Jameson for defendant.

From the evidence it appeared that the fence was erected some five years ago, and that the land now held by defendant was the Crown Lands.

An agreement was entered into by the defendant to erect another fence, a? he considered the charge made by plaintiff excessive. This, however, was not carried out. and hence the present action. Mr Jameson applied for a nonsuit, on the ground that the fence was erected before the Fencing Ord : n nee was brought into force, and that the land i ow in the occupation >»f the defendant was then Crewn Land',-and consequently the plaintiff’s were not entitled to n cover.

Case nonsuited accordingly. Cramrannd v 'Whitaker.—Claim £SO for wrongful detention of a horse. It appeared that the horse'-had. been retumeu before Hie service of the summons The case was therefore withdrawn, His Worship allowing costs, 14s, to the defendant.