RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 138, 29 September 1870, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before W. L. Simpson, Esq., RM, and Alex. Stewi.rt, K-q. Jl') Thursday, Sept. 15. j Ah Sing v. J. Fitzgerald. — This case was a ljourned for the purpose of enabling the defendant to produce his daughter in Court. Ann Fitzgerald, being put in the witness box, said she knew the difference between truth and falsehood. About a month ago she was driving home the pigs, and the Chinaman was standing beside the fence. He ran after her, tried to catch her, saying he would have her as well as her father's Lmd. Could not recognise the Chinaman. Upon Ah Sing being pointed to out her, she answered that she thought it was him ; she was not certain. Did not know her age. At another time another Chinaman ran after her. Did not know him. Told this to her father. Mr Gooday had no questions to ask. He said he was prepared to bring forward a witness, but really the evidence of the child was of so trumpery a character that he would not trouble the Court. As the child could not identify the Chinaman the charge must fall t<> the ground. The Bench remarked that they were satisfied that there was truth in the giri's statement, but she could not recognise the person. If she could do so the father would have had ample reason for what he did, and the Chinaman deserved a good hammering. Under the circumstances, and as defendant had acknowledged having committed an assault, the Bench would inflict a fine of 53., and 6*. (3d. costs of Court. The Bench warned the C.iinaman against repeating such acts to huropean girls, and hoped the warning would be attended to. Thursday, Sept. 22. (Before W. L Simpson, Esq., R. M.) M. Monaghan v. A. Fletcher — Claim, £1 12s. 6d. No appearance of defendant. Verdict for amount, with costs. Chn Kee v. Ah See.— -Claim, £12 14s. 9d. r being balance of account. In th's case it appeared that the most of the goods were supplied to a company, of which Ah See was one. Of the amount he admitted haviig got certa n articles for his own immediate use, but th > rest of the articles were for the com »any. Plaintiff accepted a non-suit to enable 'iim to have the case brought properly before the Court. Same v. Ah Xgi vie.— Claim, £6 10s. No appearance or defendant. Verdict for amount claimed, with costs The Bench directed that in future in all Cainese cases that a copy of the bill of particulars, both in Chinese and English, should be furnished along with summons. Brough v. J. Fitzgerald. — No appearance. Struck out. SvTuaDAY, Sept. 24. (Before t.ie same Magistrate.) John Farrer was brought before the Bench for being drunk and disorderly, and using obscene language. Fined iv £3 or fourteen days imprisonment for using obscene language, and two days extra for being drunk and disorderly, Monday, Sept. 26. (Before W. L. Simpson, E-q._, R.M., and H. Bastings, Esq.. J.P.,) Peter Bain was charged by Constable

Henderson with being a habitual uru<»kard. He took him in charge on the evening of Sunday at the Chinese Our.p, being drunk, and three convictions were recorded against him already within the year. Fourteen d<iys imprisonment in Tuapeka gaol with hard labour. Inspector of Nuisances v. W. M'Reath, — Defendant was charged with -ii living filch to accumulate on his premises, Ross Place, on the 23rd September. The nuisance was admitted, but pleaded that the same was occasioned by other parties. Steps had be.en taken to abate cue nuisance. Adjourned for one week. Drury v. Taylor.— Claim of £14 193. balance due on a final adjustment of partnership accounts. Mr Gnod;iy for the pUintiff, and Air. M'C>y for the defendant. Mr M'Coy moved for a non-sui*, on the ground that the bill of pirriculars of demand was not sufficient, and not iv accordance with the requirements of the 3lst sec. of R.M.s Act. lie cited Nixon v. Adfimson in support, but their Worships decided to proceed with the case., ?.3 it .appeared that s.nne written instrument c dated which would do away with the objection. The plaint ff deposed that h^ and defendant hau, some months sii cc, -jntered into parlnes'np as wood spuuor.s, and that about a month ago they agreed to dissolve. In order to do so they went to the store of Andrew Taylor, Tu,tpek.v Mouth, and th.'n a ij isted their accounts. The result was <h:tt defendant was to take everythin ' b. lon £.n 2 to rhe tirm, nn.l to pay pla'ntitf £10 19s. Ho (plaintiff) received £5 cash on account, aud «aye a receipt for it, reviving from dt-.fend.int an aecn >wle.hjeuient that he still owe 1 £14 IDs., ths amount now sued f>r. lie had not reCiived payment of this amount. Cros-jxa'iiined by Mi- M C>v — Witness denied that any uud jrs^andi'ig hit be.Mi arrived at to tlie t flrfot that lie wts to wait until defendant h.id sold certain timber prior to i>ein:» p.iid fh; balance, of £14 193. Ua also' de-iied that An Ire w Taylor \va* Within ear-shot whon he an I hi i Lite partner were makiiy their arra i^ements. For the defence, Mr. MC >y stated that his client did not deny owing the nionpy, he should he able to prove th.it whoa this balance was struck, it wai a ;re j d between, the parties to lit payment Rta'id over until the defendant hal s"l.l c r an timber, which was the par^nursh-p >c!i, and for plaintiff's portion of wlrc'i this sum, £19 19s. w.is agreed t>be p lid Instead, however, of waiting till defendant ould sail, and so provide himself w.th the moans of paying the bala ice div, plaintiff h\d at once come down ar.d is uad this procjss — in direct co'itravsr.tion of his agreement. Defendant wjs quite willing to pay when he s -Id tin timber, but until that time arrived would be unnlile to do so, and ha confidently claimed the benetit of tho -i^r.'Mn -nt. The facts as stated by Mr. M C >y w^ra sworn to by the dtfjtulanl, and by hia brother, Androw T.iylor, admitting ths debt, i>ut claiming time as p^r a^rdein jnt. Their Worships gave, judgment f<>r plaintiff — the amount to be paid ia fourteen days. Brough v Fitzgerald.— Claim of £j 13s. 41. When this ca,ss was called o-i, Mr. M'Coy, f- r the plaintiff,, ataiid that the parties had arranged the iniittgr.