RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1858, 26 February 1889, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Temdka—Monday, February 25, 1889. [B.fore Captain C. A, Wray, JR.M., and K, F. Gray and J. T. M. Hayhurst, Esqs., J.Ps. ALLEGED FORCIBLE ENTRY.

Haoui Kahu, Harry Kahn, Edward Waaka, Warahi TeKou, aurl Tira Parahn appeared on remand, charged with having on the 19fch of February, at Milford, forcibly entered into certain land, of which Thomas Greedy was then possessed for a certain and unexpired teroo of years, and did unlawfully put him out of said laud, contrary to the statute. Messrs Raymond and Aspinall appeared for the prosecution, and Mr White for defendants, Mr Rickus was sworn in as an interpreter. Mr Raymond opened the case for the prosecution, and quoted the statute of Richard 11. to show that no one should enter upon land by force. He then explained the case, and quoted law to show that oven if Greedy had no right to the land the measures taken by the defendants in ejecting him forcibly conetitnted a forcible entry. Thomas Greedy : I am a farmer at Milford, occupying certain lands from the Maoris under lire agreement produced. (Agreement read). Paid rent tinder these leases, and it is paid to date. On tho 15th

instant a nv Mr liickns, Harry Kahn, John Kahu, and Edward Waaka r.t Seadown. Mr Uickiifl asked mo how T lull 11.0 land, I told him I took some of it for eight years, and he told mo I was dealing with the wrong parly, and that the other throe would be my landlords. He demanded £lO hack rent. Mr Rickus was speaking for the others, I told him ray rot was paid up to date. He said if 1 dealt with those they would put me on a proper footing. I said if you break the lease I will give you the money. If you put the lease on a proper footing [ do not care who gets the money. I meant by this that 1 would pay them any future rents. My rent was paid up at (he time. They then went away. On the following Monday saw Harry and J. Kahn, and E. Waaka, Met them on the road within 15 chains of the paddock. They asked if I was coming back again. I said I was, as I was stocking there. These with two ether Maoris were at the gate on my return from dinner. The accused are those who were there. They asked would I agree to give them the £lO back rent, and 1 said 1 would not. Harry Kaliu said lie would give me 20 minutes to consider it. I loft the paddock that night, and fastened the gate with a lock and a chain. Next morning, between 6 and 7 0 clock, saw one of the accused at the gate. All of them were there at 9.30. outside the gate on the road. John Kahn asked if certain cows belonged to me. I said t! Yes." He told me to remove them and said if I did not he would. I warned him that the gate was locked, and he was not to go into the paddock. Went away across the liver, and when 1 reached the bank saw the horses and cows on the road. Game back, and mot E. Waaka near the river. Asked what he meant by turning the stock out. Ho said John Kaliu turned them out. Emind the fastening on the gale broken. Went then to Temuka, and returned with a constable. All of them were there then with the exception of Parahu. They were on the road when the police went down. 1 went to the gate to put ray raaro in, but Harry Kahn jumped inside and shoved me b«ck. Then I thought to gel through the fence, and John Kahn pushed me clean out, and warned me not to put my foot inside the paddock. I sdd I would, and he said if I woui lit would bo worse for me. I told the constable my harness was in the paddock. John Kahu said I could get the harness. On Wednesday morning fastened the chain wilh two padlock?. They never produced any title to the land. Haye been in occupation of the land some years, and the first objection they raised was 4 months ago. They knew all along I was in occupation of it.

To Mr White : Saw the Crown Grant of the land with Tommy, and I understood from some of the Maoris there were 19 names on it, but raj' crop whs cut then. 1 believe there was a split ring ; n the chain, but I could not swear whether it was by tiie split ring the gate was opened. The lock was on, and all right. I left the paddock, and was not forcibly kept from returning. No one prevented me from takin g the harness. 1 took a warrant out but did not like doing so, hut I wanted to get them out of the way to save my harvest. To Mr Raymond : About four or five months ago endeavored to make arrangements with the accused but could not. Told ms there would bo a meeting. There was a meeting, and I attended it, and was there until 3 a.m., but nothing was done. This concluded the prosocuioi’s examination, and His Worship eoid there was no case. The accused were accordingly discharged, CITIL CASES. Dr Hayes v. Lynch—Claim £5 ss. Judgment by default for the amount claimed and costs. Proprietor Temuka Leader v, John Dull—Cl dm £1 18s. —Mr White consented to judgment for the amount, lees 10s phd to Fisher. J, Brown v. Tims. Cleary—Claim £l6 19s 7d.—Judgment summons. Mr Aspmall appeared for the plaintiff. The plaintiff stated (ho defendant since judgment had been given had disposed of his property. He sold some of it to his sister. He obtained goods to the value of the amount from witness to pay some men he had employed in goods, i David Leach stated defendant sold him a horse for £2O. He paid £lO down, and a few pounds since. Defendant offered him another horse about the same time at £26. and offered to take a throe months’ bill for it. He did not remember the date, but it was in January. Thomas Cleary said he sold a dray, two horses.and a tip cart to his sister for £26. One of the horses was the one he offered to sell to Mr Leach. He was not receiving wages from his sister. He was only staying there. Judgment was given to the effect that the amount bo paid at the rate of £1 per week, or in default of any payment 14 . daj s’ imprisonment.

J. F. Douglas v. A. Humphrey—Claim £1 9s 9d.

Mr Aspinall appeared for defendant. In this case the defendant wont to Timaru, thinking the case would be heard there, and, finding out bis mistake, telegraphed that he would made all haute to Terauka. He had not arrived when the case was called, and the plaintiff insisted upon it going on.

Mr Aspinall said in that case he would ask for a nonsuit. Mr Douglas sued in his own name, whereas he ought to have sued in the name of his sen. Minors could now sue for wages. He would not have raised this objection only Mr Douglas would not consent to an adjournment.

Mr Douglas said ho would under such circumstances consent to an adjournment, Mr AspinaM said in that case he would waive the point. The case was adjourned for a week. The Court then rose.