THE COURTS. RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume VI, Issue 285, 17 July 1873, Page 5

THE COURTS. RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before E. H. Carew, Esq., R.M.) Tuesday, Bth July. L. C. Ilolmes, Town Clerk, charged Henry Det-rt, contractor, with using abusing and threatening language on the 2nd July. Mr. M'Coy appeared for the accused, and cross-examined the complainant. The accused was fined 40s. azid 6s. 6d. costs, and in default, one month's imprisonment. Harris v. M'Cann.— Claim for £22 3s. 6d. on ii promissory note. No appearance of defendant. Verdict for amount claimed, and 28s. costs of court. In the adjourned oa3o of M l Combe v. Grieva, a verdict for plan tiff wa3 given for 10s. and 14s. costs of court, 11s. expense of one witness, and 21s. professional costs. The following is the judgment : — In this case the first question to take into consideration is whether there has been proof of possession by the plaintiff, either actual or constructive, so as to enable him to maintain his suit. The law as laid down is that very slight evidence of possession is sufficient whereon to support an action as against a mere wrongdoer. Plaintiff has proved that he became possessed of the property in January, 1872, and he swears positively that he has not parted with it ; that he did not sell it to M'Douall, but simply entered into an agreement to sell to him on payment of tha money. He is positive that M'Donall paid him no money on account of the property. It is proved also that M'Douall quitted possession some time before the 21st June, leaving certain goods in the house, which M 'Combe says M'Douall requested him to take charge of. The evidence of defendant seeks to prove an admission as positively as the defendant asserts it. There is also evidence of conversations between the parties, which tends to show some acknowledgement by defendant of possession being with plaintiff. Taken together there is ample evidence of possession to maintain this action. Upon defendant's plea of leave and license, the evidence does not show that the leave was co-ex-tenaive with the acts of which plaintiff complains. It also shows that, the alleged leave was obtained upon a misrepresentation that the defendant was going to take possession as a bailiff under process of law. upon both of these grounds the plea must fail.

(Before E. H. Carew, Esq., R.M.) Saturday, 12fch July. Mary Ann ILtrris, charged by the polico with being drunk and disorderly, was tined 403., in default three days imprisonment. The prisoner wis also charged with vagrancy, but it was withdrawn.