RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1941, 10 September 1889, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka—Monday, Sept. 9, 1889. [Before Captain 0, A. Wray, R.M.] DEDNKENNESS. A first offender was charged with having been drunk on the 7th September, and was let off with a caution. ASSAULT. William Henderson was charged with having assaulted Wra. Frew on the 27’th August,

Mr Aspinail appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Hay for the defence. Alex. Frew, residing at Waitohi, sworn, said : Remember the 27th. Defendant, with two others, came to the gate that loads to my workshop and wanted to get out some flax. Told him I did not want him to go that way ; he could go by the riverbed. I had hold of the gate, which was closed. Henderson forced me back, and I lost my position ; but I regained it, and reolosed the gate. Shortly afterwards :

Henderson said, “Come along, my boys, and take the flax here.” They went to where there was an opening in the fence, but found that it was blocked up with gorse i had put there, Henderson said if he was inside the gate he would soon put me into the creek. He walked about in fighting attitude, and came back and toon me by the beard and struck me. Thomas Oliver was present, Defendant called me names. (Names given.) I asked Olliver if he would stand by me, as I was single-handed, and he did so. To Mr Hay; I was aware tbe men came for Mr Bruce’s flax. Did not object to their taking the flax away, but weqlol not allow them to take it by the way wanted. Did not sell the flax too cheap, Refused them permission to go that way to get the flax the day before. The time for taking the flax according to agreement' jhad expired. The gate was between us when defendant struck me ; and it was ithe fall length of his arm, as i leaned iback. Henderson’s fingers wore never in the gate. Was a little excited. Thos. Oliver, laborer: Remember 27th August. Passing Mr Frew’s, saw a row Igoing on. Mr Frew called me over and asked me to stay, Just as I came down ;saw the men go with a plank to a part of !the fence, and Henderson said “We’ll jsoon smash the —— thing down.” When they could not get in they wont back, and Henderson got hold of Mr Frew’s board land struck at him. He said if be was tbe other side of tbe gate be would throw him 'into the creak. Heard him call Mr Frew names.

To Mr Hay: Mr Frew refused them permission to come up the terrace ; they could go up the riverbed, where they had gone before. • Mr Hay briefly ouH.ined the case for tbe defence, and called Wm. Bloomfield, who said ; I am ing at Bruce’s flax mill. Remember 2Tth August. Was present on the p’reyiotS day also. Henderson was only present on the second day. On Friday Mr Frew refused to allow os to get tbe flax, and we went back. On Saturday we again went to-Mr Frew’s gate ; that was the nearest way out. Previously we had taken the flax down tbe thatbeing the nearest way out with the flax first eat. Mr Frew, refused to allow us to go in the gate. He wanted ns to go round by the had to carry tbe flax ten chains instead of one chain. Saw the assault. Henderson pushed Frew back from tbe gate, and Henderson’s fingers got caught in the gate. Did not see him catch Mr Frew by the beard. He pushed Frew back to getsbis fingers out, be did not strike, a blow at him. < One was as bad as the other as ■regards language. - W, Henderson, defendant: lAm ’em* ployed by Mr Bruce to dray flax to the mill. Cut flax at Mr Frew’s place. Took some of it away down the riverbed. One lot of flax was at one end of (be place, and one at the other. We would have had to carry the second lot of flax 10 chains if we had taken it down the river. On the 27th went to Mr Frew’s gate—that .being tbe ordinary way—to get tbe flax. Mr Bruce told us to go that way. Met Mr Frew at the gate. My hand got jammed in tbe gate, and 1 struck at him My left hand was caught in the gate, and with my right I made a motion as if to\ strike. I seized him by the beard and / struck at him, but did not bit him. Wb were both agitated, W. Henderson, jun., son of defendant, was present, and saw the row. He did not see his father take complainant by the beard. His father’s fingers got jammed in the gate, and ho struck at Frew. The Resident Magistrate said no doubt an assault had been committed, but not a very serious one. A fine of 6a and costs was inflicted. CITIL CASES.

H. Williams v. E. Edgeworth—Claim £4lB,

Judgment by default for amount claimed, and costs. H. Williams v. W. Hayhursfc—Claim £2 16s 6d. Defendant admitted the debt, but said he had not the money to pay, as he could not get his money in. Defendant expressed his willingness to allow a month for settlement, and judgment was entered up accordingly. H. Williams v. H. Braar—Claim 16s 9d. Judgment by default for amount claimed, and costs.

Burrows and Heap v. A. G. Wright— Claim £l4 14s 6d. Mr Salmond for plaintiffs, and Mr Hay for defendant. The defendant in this case had for a time been a boarder at the late Mrs Heap’s Hotel, and owed her the amount claimed for board. Mrs Heap was indebted to Mr Ackroyd a considerable sura for butcher’s meat, and had given him two promissory notes, which he sold to Mr Wright for £l4. W. Ackroyd, butcher, deposed to supplying Mrs Heap with meat, for which he received the bills endorsed to Mr Wright. Mrs Ackroyd endorsed them at his direction. Wright was to pay £l4 for the bills. Do not remember when they were endorsed.

To Mr Salmond: Could not say whether they were endorsed last year or this. Sold the bills to Wright about November. Wright was t.o get the bills when he found it necessary. Did not attend the meeting of creditors of the late Mrs Heap’s estate. Mr Whitehead was there. Did not know whether he proved for the promissory notes or not. Other money was owing.

To Mr day : The bills were endorsed several months ago ; before they were dishonored. The arrangement was that Wright should become responsible in any case, for the £l4.

A. G. Wright, engineer, living at Temuka.: Received the bills from Mr Ackreyd. The arrangement to buy the bills was made on 18th or 19th November for £l4. The bargain was absolute. The money has not been paid. Did not get delivery till 19th December, when 1 called for them. At that time the bills were still current.

To Mr Salmond ; I made arrangement on 18th November and got them on I9th December. Mr Ackroyd has not asked me for the money. The amount was fixed on because that was nearly tb a amount of my claim. The fact is Ackroyd supplied'the meat, I ato.it, and «© I thought he had a right to be paid for if. Did not know at that time the bills woh/of not be met. The transaction was not profitable to me, but had Mrs Heap livetf I should have eaten the whole amount of the bilis. I gave Mr Aspinail notice I had the bills in December, Mr Aspinail previously interviewed me in reference to that debt,*and I am not sure whether I

mentioned the bills to him. Wa spoke about correcting the amount of my account. To Mr Hay : Mr Aspinall spoke to me the about account, and it was agreed I owed £l4 12s 6d, Counsel then addreaed the Court, Mr Salmond contending that the transfer was fraudulent, and Mr Hay that it Was perfectly bona fide and legal. His \Vorebip reserved judgment. A. W. L. Cottrell v. E. Lee—Claim £l6, damages for non-deli very ®f potatoes. Mr Hay appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Raymond for defendant, YA. W. L. Cottrell, produce merchant, carrying on business in Timaru : On 9tb July saw Mr Lee, and bought 16 tons of potatoes at £3 5s per toa. They were to be delivered during August. Was buying for shipment, and told Mr Lee so. Next saw Mr Lee in Temuka about a week afterwards. Told him I had got a letter from Oamaru to ship potatoes bs early as possible, and that I had re-sold them to Mr Connell as soon as I bought them. He said “ Get them away as soon as possible.” No deposit was paid when sale was made. He wanted one, and I said, “If you want any money call at my place and I will give you some.” At this interview said 1 would pay for the potatoes on delivery. Don’t think I saw Mr Lee again till to-day. Forwarded letter on 31st July, asking potatoes to be sent for shipment by the Tekapo. Got reply stating that defendant must get cheque marked good by banker for £55 before potatoes would be , delivered. On 13th August again wrote, stating that papers must be delivered for Tekapo, and money would be paid in gold or notes. Next day received reply, stating Mr Lee had re-sold. Replied, stating that I had purchased other potatoes, and ‘ asking for the difference in price. On the 17th I bought 40 tons potatoes at £4 5s per ton. That was market value at the t>me. They had been £4los on the 12th, and £4 5s ©n the 19th. Never refused to i take delivery or pay for the potatoes. To Mr Raymond : Some little before saw Mr Lee saw his man, and took samples. Den’t "remember saying anythiog to the man about the payment. Concluded no sale, and made no negotiation. Mentioned price. Had no previous transaction with Mr Lee. When I saw Mr Lee told him 1 heard ha had not sold the potatoes, and went over with him to tha ploughman. Only a few words were said to the ploughman. He said someone had offered £3 ss, and pay half cash. 1 said I had made an offer of £3 5s if they would keep them in pits until September. Mr Lee asked me for a deposit of about £ls, not £2O. I said if he had a blank cheque on the Bank of N.Z. I would give him a deposit. Did not promise to send a cheque on the following day. Promised to give him £ls or £2O if he wanted it. He said he might want £2O. In conversation in Temuka he mentioned the deposit again, Told him 1 had got word potatoes were to be delivered as soon as possible. Told him I would pay the whole amount when the potatoes were delivered. The next communication I received was the letter of 6th August, stating marked cheque must be sent for £55, ns 1 had not fulfilled promise. Knew nothing of what promise / defendant was referring to. Took it that his remark had reference to money—the 'whole of the money. Promised to pay as soon as potatoes were off weighbridge. When the purchase was made no reference was made to particular date of delivery. No agreement was made that if 1 did not take the potatoes on 10th the transaction was to fall through. On August 16 was prepared to have given Mr Lee gold or notes for the potatoes as written. The money would have come from Mr Connell. Gave large chequss on that date, and they were honored. Bank with' the Bank of New Zealand. Dishonored no cheque on August 16, Tha produced cheque was dishonored on that dale on purpose. It was on account of frosted potatoes ; that affair was settled. To Mr Hay : I resold potatoes, and had an arrangement with Mr Connell and the banker that potatoes should be paid for cn dolivory. No specific date was fixed for taking delivery. There was no difference in price of potatoes on truck at Temuka and ir Timaru. Based quotations on enquiries made. Paid Hoare £3 15s, and provided sacks, equal to £4 ss, delivered at Tinruu. Mr Lee never wrote asking for money on deposit after conversation in Temuka. "Mr Raymond briefly opened the case for defendant, and called E. Lee, defendant, who deposed : On July 9 saw Cottrell at my slaughterhouse. Mr Cottrell introduced himself. Asked whether he was tbf man who bought the potatoes off my ploughman, and he said “ Yes.” Took him over to the ploughman. Chaffed him about buying potatoes frpm my man without a deposit, and said he must pay one. He asked if I had a cheque, and i said “ No.” Ha then said he would forward £2O next day. We then went over to the s'aughlerliouse and signed the sale note. Told him if he loft the potatoes after 10th of August I would not let him have them on any account, as 1 would not take the horses from ploughing. Cottrell made out the sale note. After that Cottrell drove away. Ho Dover sent any money. The deposit was part of the arrangement. Next saw defendant in Temuka about three days atter. We were both driving, and he had another man with him. He said ; “By the way, Lee, I h-jve not sent cheque, but will do so to-morrow.” I r-aid, “Do so." Never saw him after till this morning. Never agreed to abandon the deposit or lima of delivery. In my letter re promise referred to deposit. Went to Timaru on August 10 on purpose to see him. Sold potatoes on 13tb. Was to get £3 5s from Cottrell, railage paid. Got £3 15s from Langridge, delivered in I’imrau, which netted me 4s 5s pei ton above the price named by Cottrell. Tried to sell other potatoes, but could not. Sold potatoes to Langridgo on J2ch August. On 10th tried Bowker and Collins as buyers. Did not ask what price they were selling. Saw Collins sell some at 6s per bag. Did not try to buy potatoes. Had to plough round pits ; bad to fence them ; had to go over ploughed land. Ploughing was commenced in July. September was never mentioned as time of delivery, nor during August. He wos to take the potatoes in July, and after that he was to pay Is 6d per ton per week but I would not keep them after 10th August.' Would not have delivered the potatoes to Cottrell after 10th August * unless he had paid even more if he had paid the money. Don't think I bad any rioht to do more than I did in the way of giving Cottrell notice. Did not speak to Cottrell about reselling potatoes.

To Mr Raymond : 1 have 63 bags of potatoes at the station now. They are part of those sold to Cottrell. Showed them to Mr K. F. Gray and Mr A. R, Allan. No mention was made by Cottrell when buying about shipment. When selling I said “ You did not pay deposit before; ‘ I must have one, because if potatoes go down I shall have no security.” He asked for a blank cheque, but I had not one, and he said he would forward £2O from Timaru. I fluid “All right; that binds the bargain.” F. Hooper, a ploughman in Mr Lee’s employ, deposed to seeing Cottrell in May last in reference to potatoes. He said he was prepared to pay half the money down. Referred him to Mr Lee. Lee brought him to me on the 9th, and asked if this was: the man who bought the potatoes. Said “Yes.” Lee said he could still have the potatoosif he fulfilled agreement. They were to be taken away on 10th August. Mr Leo would not consent to them remaining after that, even though be offered to pay Is 6d per ton per week. He promised to send cheque for £2O next day. K. F. Gray stated he had some experience in .dealing in potatoes. Mr Lee’s i potatoes were ‘ good, and were worth £3 10s to £3 15s f.o.b. per ton. In reply to Mr Hay, be satd he effected no sales at these times. He would not place much reliance oq the commercial reports of the Herald. Would not be led by Mr Celling report, file arrived at the price by what he would have taken himself at the time. Offered them to Mr Bowker for £3 16s about that time.

A. R. Allen stated that £3 10a a ton was about the price of potatoes on August 12tb. To Mr Hay: Had no transactions at that time in potatoes. Was trying to buy at £3 10s a ton at that time and provide the sacks, which would add 5s to cost. Could have bought potatoes at £3 10s without bags. This concluded the evidence, and on the suggestion of Mr Hay it was decided to adjourn the case until the following day at Timaru when counsel will be heard and judgment given, The Court then rose.