RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1119, 10 July 1883, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka— Monday, Juiy9, 1883,

[Before J. Beswick, Esq., R.M.] STRAY CATTLE. "'.Arthur Gibb 3 was charged with allowing one cow belonging to him to wander oh the railway, and was fined 20s and costs. Edwin Forward was charged with allowing two horses belonging to him to wander on the public road, aud was fined 5s and costs. PROTECTION ORDER, Mr Aspinall on behalf of Mrs Roddick applied for a protection order which was granted, the applicant to recaive £1 per week. CIVIL OASES. Temnka Butter, Cheese and Baconcuring Factory Company, v. W. McCann—Cfem £8 17s 3d. Mr Aspinall appeared for the plaintiffs. An application to have the evidence of defendant taken in the Mataura Court having been put in, the case was adjourned for a month. Mr Aspinall asked His Worship if he decided as to the jurisdiction of the Court. His Worship said he had no doubt but that the Court had jurisdiction. B. Thomson v, W. Stonyer—Claim £5 ss. Judgement by default for the amount claimed and costs.

Temuka Butter, Cheese and Baconcuring Factory, Company v, Con, Morgan—Claim £5 6s 6d, Mr Aspinall appeared for the plaintifls.

Judgment by default for amount claimed and costs.

B. Thomson v. F. F. Clay ton—Claim £2 8s 3d.

Judgment by default for the amount claimed and costs.

W. Walker v. George Cross—Claim £ll 18s Bd.

Judgment by default for the amount claimed and costs.

Ellen Breakwell v. F. FranksClaim £1 9s 6d.

The plaintiff stated that she got a protection order from her husband in Juno 1881, and in July of the same year sold 25 willows, one cask, and one jar to the defendant, The defendant denied knowing anything about them. K. Franks give evidence to the effect that Mrs Breakwell brought a cask to him which had contained catsup, but it was no good. He did not get a jar from her. Judgment was given for. defendant, with the understanding that he would return the cask.

J. Roddick v. M Quinn—Claim £3 13s.

This was a claim for expenses incurred as a tvitness, but it turned out that it was in a case connected with the plaintiff's bankruptcy, and judgment was given for defendant. Peter Cnira v. E S Pearson—Claim £3Slls9d.

Mr Smithson appeared for the defendant, and said he was too ill to attend. He would prove that defendant was charged with having got drinks on days that he was not there at all.

In reply to the Court, Mr Smithson said he would plead under the Tippling Acrj| ,<t would like to examine the witnegsWfirst.

,• 'Peter, Coira was then examined at ipmo length, and at the close of his evidence the case wag adjourned for a fortnight. Mr Smithsou applied to have thb ca3o of Thomson v, Stonyer reinstated. Mr Stouyer had lost his horse that morning, and that was the cause of hie absence, ' W fetouyer was put in the box, and he,| uworothat he lived nine miles away,' |

and that his horse went astray from him that morning. Leave was granted to apply for reinstating the case that day fortnight. The Court then rose.