RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3576, 12 June 1880, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

(Before H. Kenrick, Esq.,'B.M.) CIVIL SIDEJI DAIZIEL V. TILIEB.

Mr Miller, in addressing the Court, said that he was of opinion that there was. no evidence to the effect that the defendant had been guilty of neglect. The plaintiff, if anyone, had been the offending party, and the mishap had been partly caused by him. The plaintiff had also been guilty of overloading the boat. The plaintiff, no doubt knowing that there was a beast in the slings and nearly dead, thought to make Mr Tiller pay for the beast. By contributing to the negligence (if there had been any negligence) the plaintiff could not obtain any redress. Mr Braasey said the question the Court had to consider was whether Tiller bad any right to unload the beast at the spot on which he did. The course which the defendant should have adopted was to hare landed them at Tararu where there was deep water. The Court could say that the men had taken all the care they could, as they had disobeyed the authority of the plaintiff in the first place. He contended that Mr Dalziel when he chartered the boat had a perfect right to use the deck as well as the hold.

His Worship said he had come to a conclusion last night on the case, and the address of the legal gentlemen in nowise altered his decision. The custom had hitherto been either to land cattle at Tararu at high water, or to bring them to the flat and land them on the bard. Any departure from this custom would be an infringement, without there was pressing necessity. In this case that plea was urged. He had-to judge on the evidence of Captain Tiller and his brother, as that of Mr Dalziel was not evidence—he not being present. He thought that the defendant had exercised due care, and he should therefore give judgment for the defendant with costs £4 7s.

ASSAULT. —JOHN MABE V. AILEN JOHNSON,

Mr Brassey appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Miller for the defendant. Mr Brassey • said that the parties were carters, and that the plaintiff was struck by Mr Johnson, but that the latter received a certain amount of provocation. * ' '■. The Court inflicted a fine of Is and costs, £2 2s, and remarked that the case would hare been better kept out of Court. Court adjourned.