RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1460, 28 January 1886, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka—Wednesday, Jan. 27, 1885. [Before D. Inwood, J. Talbot, and K. F, Gray, Esqs., J.P.’s.] CIVIL CASES. J. Blytli v. G. Taylor—Claim £4 10s 4d. —Judgment by default. Lukey v. Williams Claim £7. — Adjourned for a week. Same v. Cope—Claim £2.—Adjourned for a week. J, Brown v. H, Kuhu—Claim £4 10s. Judgment summons. Plaintiff gave evidence to the effect that defendant had been earning good wages for a month as he had boon shearing at Mr Postlethwaite’s, and he knew that he had received money. He could not say what the amount was, hut it must be over £lO. Defendant ha 1 also been shearing at another place.

Defendant said that when plaintiff summoned him he paid £1 on account. Last Monday he received the judgment summons. He wanted time to pay the rest. The money he had received since he had been summoned would scarcely keep the house. He bad been shearing for the last fortnight. He was willing to pay 10s per week. Judgment was given that £1 should be paid at once, the balance in instilments of 10» a week; in default of any payment one weeks imprisonment. F. White v. F. Demuth—Claim 19s 6d. Mr Tosswill appeared for plaintiff. Defendant, who did not appear, was not represented. Peter Bertie said ho was formerly an hotelkeeper at Temuka. The plaintiff was indebted to him to tho amount claimed at the time witness filed. It was still due and owing. Frank White said the debt sued for, with several others, were assigned to him by the deed produced. The amount was still due and owing. On the deed of assignment being put in, Mr Lynch said he appeared for defendant in another case brought on by the same plaint ff, and he might then object to the deed of oasigumenl now before the (Jourt. He made these remarks because he did not wish his case to be prejudiced by the decision in the present one. Judgment for plaintiff with costs. F. White v. T. Egan—Claim £5 10i6q, Mr Tosswill appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Lynch for defendant. Peter Bertie said he kept the books produced. The whole of the entries were in his handwriting. They were msde at the time. £5 10s 6d was due at the time he filed. He had a conversation with defendant. Defendant admitted the account, and said “ I suppose you will summons me now,” and I told him to go to Mr White. He said the account was perfectly correct, and he would pay as soon as he could. The account was incurred in December, 1884. To Mr Lynch : He could not say how many times the account had been sent to defendant. Ho could not say the date be filed. He put the items down on the dales mentioned. Mr Lynch, reading from the account sued for, asked whether the witness put the item 10s, charged for refreshments on a certain date, down at the time it was contracted. Witness said be did, but on referring to the books said there was no such entry there. Mr Lynch said he should apply for a nonsuit as they were not properly before the Court, as the account and the book debts did not correspond. Mr Tosswill said they could prove by the evidence of the accountant who made out the account that the items on it were correct. , t Witness continued: He knew nothing about tho account Mr Lynch was referring to. He did not render it. He swore to the books. He bad not seen the books for 7 months. He remembered the defendant getting married. He was in witness’ house on January 2nd, 1885, and he was in his house on the 26th and 27th. He made these entries at the time they were got. J. Ashwell stated that he had seen the defendant, who admitted that he owed some money, but not so much as the amount claimed. Frank White, on being sworn, produced the deed of assignment under which he purchased the book debts. He had given the book debts to collect to Mr Ash well. Mr Lynch raised legal points to the effect that tho account did not correspond with the book ; that tho deed had not been proved to have been signed by the Deputy Assignee, and that no notice of the assignment had been given to the defendant. The Bench decided to hear the evidence. Thomas Egan, the defendant j Previous to the 2nd of January, 1885, was staying at Bertie’s hotel, when I left, and did not return till the 30th. It is not true that I had meals on the 26th and 27th of January. Haver had 12s worth of drinks together. Was away the whole month at Bskbank. To Mr Toswill : Am not sure whether it was the 30th or 31st I came from the south. Married on tire day I came back. Did not go to the hotel at all. Got my clothes from the hotel after I was married. The Court gave judgment for tho amount claimed and coats. F. White v. J. C. Smithson—Claim £8 16s 6d. Mr Tosswill appeared for the plaintiff, and judgment was given for amount claimed and coats. The Court then rose.