RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 107, 26 February 1870, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before W. L. Simpson, Esq., R.M.) Monday, 21st February. Smith v. Pearson. — Claim of £5, damage sustained to plaintiff, James Smith, butcher, Wetherstones, by reason of the defendant, John Pearson having allowed 26 head of cattle (his property) to trespass upon the plaintiffs property. Mr. Keen appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Mouat for the defendant. There was a cross action in which Pearson sought to recover £30 from Smith for a similar trespass. It appeared that the parties were owners of adjoining paddocks, and that the dividing fence was very bad. It appeared further that Smith had always been anxious to pay his share towards a good fence. After hearing evidence, his "Worship in the first case found for plaintiff in the full amount claimed (£5) and costs ; and in the second case for defendant, £2 and costs. Grundy v. Cullen and Galloway. — Claim of £5 for loss of season in consequence of breach of contract by defendants. Mr Keen for plaintiff ; Mr Mouat appeared for the defendant, Cullen on a written authority. The other defendant did not appear. The plaintiffs case Avas that in Nov. last, the defendant Galloway called upon him with the entire horse "Prince Chaaley," and made a contract with him for one mare. The fee was to be £3, which was to be paid in the event of the mare proving in foal, but not otherwise. He engaged to bring the horse to plaintiff's farmyard on certain dates, but failed to do so at all. Corroborative evidence was given by two witnesses, who also stated that Mr. Cullen's name was appended to the advertisement, and also to the cards which the defendant, Galloway circulated concerning the horse. Mr Keen stated that he had depended upon the defendant, Galloway being present to prove by him that Mr Cullen was part owner of the horse. Mr Mouat said that he *had also depended upon the presence of Galloway, to prove the opposite. His instructions were that Mr Cullen was the owner of the horse, and that he had hired the horse to Galloway for the season, and consequently had no responsibility. Mr. Cullen would have attended but for the fact that it would actually cost him more than the sum for which he was sued to come from the Taieri to defend. Mr Keen called his Worship's attention to the fact that on a former occasion, Galloway had sworn that Mr Cullen was his (Galloway's) partner in the horse. His Worship reserved judgemnt desiring Mr Mouat to get an affidavit from Mr Cullen. Fyfe v. Ah Chun Sin.— Claim of £7 10s. for rice. This case was adjourned owing to the plaintiff not having with him all his books of account. Tuesday, 22nd February. (Before the same Magistrate.) Corporation of Lawrence v. J. L. S. Keen. His Worship gave judgment in this case. He said that the defence set up by the defendant must be sustained. The Council was consulted under the Ordinance, and had made certain standing orders for its guidance. One of these (the 23rd) provided that "no resolution, the effects of which would be to rescind a former resolution, should be entertained during the same municipal year, unless a special call of the whole Council was made for that purpose." In November, Mr. Keen had thought proper to resign, and the Council thought proper to refuse to receive his resignation. Mr. Keen, therefore, continued to be a member of the Council. Subsequently the Council took it into its head to rescind the resolution by which they refused to accept Mr. Keen's resignation, and they made a call of the Council ; but they forgot to call Mr. Keen, who being a member of the Council, was entitled to notice under the 23rd standing order ; and as such notice had not been vouchsafed to Mr. Keen, the proceedings at that special meeting of the Lawrence Town Council ware most specially and incontravertably illegal. He should therefore dismiss the case. His Worship further said that in addition to the defence set up, another reason existed why the plaintiffs could not recover. The clause in the Ordinance under which they sued enacted that " any person elected into any corporate office may at any time resign such office on payment of the fine, which he would have been liable to pay for non-acceptance of the same office." Consequently no councillor could resign without a voluntary payment of £25. A voluntary payment be it remembered ; and without that voluntary payment the resignation could not, under any circumstances, be in any manner entertained. The Council could not say, "We accept this resignation, and we fine the councillor so and so." Unless the L 25 was paid, the resignation could not be received at all. The only remedy the Council would have under such circumstances, would be to fine for non-attendance. Case dismissed. " Mr. Keen applied for expenses ; he had been put to a good deal of trouble in defending this action, and submitted that he was entitled to expenses. Mr. Mouat opposed. His Worship said that the verdict would stand for the defendant with 21s. expenses. Thursday, Feb. 24. (Before the same Magistrate.) LARCENY. Charley Ah Sin, a Chinaman, was charged on the information of William Fisher, with having robbed his tail-race on a certain date. Constable Titchener

prosecuted, and Mr. Mouat and Mr. Keen appeared for the accused. The case against the prisoner was that on the 11th inst. while informant was asleep in the store of one Ah Wing at Tuapeka Flat he (the prisoner^ with another Celestial went to Fisher's tailrace, and washed up about 30 yards of it ; that Fisher was meanwhile aroused by two Chinamen, who said what was going on, and upon proceeding to the race found the accused in the act of abstracting gold. The prisoner appeared much frightened and immediately restored what gold he had taken. For the defence, a witness was called who proved that Fisher had given a race to theaccused, telling him that there was some gold in it which he might have ; and it was also proved that Fisher had two tailraces in close proximity to each other, one of which he had given to accused. It was also shewn that Fisher had threatened violence to accused, and had followed him with a stick. It was contended that accused being a foreigner had been mistaken as to which race had been given to him ; and as he had gone to work in broad daylight, it was not probable that he had been actuated by any felonious intent. His Worship thought otherwise, and sentenced accused to one month's imprisonment. Bathgate v. M'lntosh. — This case again came on for hearing. It was a claim of L3O, the value of two head of cattle said to have been in the possession, order, or disposition of Allan M'lntosh, a bankrupt, but now claimed by David, bankrupt's brother. By an order of the Supreme Court, certain cattle had been taken and sold, but these two head could not be found. David M'lntosh was sworn, and deposed at great length to his transactions with his brother Allan, and aa to the purchase by him of the cattle in 1867 from Allan. Upon Allan being called, however, he at once contradicted his brother's account of the matter, and his Worship severely animadverted upon the disgraceful nature of the evidence — evidence which he said was worse than any he had ever heard. Found for the plaintiff for the full amount claimed, with costs and expenses. It being after 5 p.m., the case, executors of Griffin v. Buchanan was adjourned, and the Court rose. \,J