MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXIX, Issue 8168, 26 June 1906, Page 5

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

MASTERTON—MONDAY.

(Before Mr W. P. James, S.M.)

Drunkenness. —A first offender was fined 5s for having been drunk. Debt Caeea.—Judgment was given for plaintiff by default in the following debt cases:—Herbert T. Wood v. D. Sinclair, claim £3 15s l.ld„ judgment for £2 15s lid, costs 3a; A. 0. Major v. Peter Hansen, claim lis, costs sa; Benjamin Richard Rayner v. James Hodder, claim £35 12s 6d, costs £2 18s;; Masterton County Council v. A. E. Watson, claim £22 14? 3d, judgment for £ls 18s 3d, costs £1 9?; London Warehouse Company v. George D. Oakley, claim £4 17s 6d, costs lis. Defended Cases.—Margaret Thomson claimed from Frederick Charles O'Connor the sum of £l4. Mr B. J. Dolan appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr C. A. Pownall appeared for the defendant. The Magistrate nonsuited plaintiff without ousts. H. G. Swan, dentist, claimed from G. S. W. Dalrymple the sum of £4 5s 6d. Defendant entered a counter-claim for £2 2s. Afte t r hearing the evideooe the Magistrate nonsuited defendant on the counter claim, and gave judgment for plaintiff for the full amount claimed, with £2 18s costs. The Masterton Farmers' Implement Company, represented by Mr D. K. Logan, claimed from D. H. Knowles the sum of £5 4s 6d. The case was adjourned for a montn in order to allow defendant to obtain certain evidence. Assault.r-Arthar Brightwell, labourer, was charged on the information of James McGuirk, coachdriver, with having assaulted McGuirk on s May 22nd, at Blairlogie. Mr 0. A. Pownall appeared for informant, and Mr D. K. Logan for the defendant. James MoGuirk said that ho was driving the mail coach from Masterton to Homewood on May 22nd last. When he reached Blairlogie near Maofcay's he put off some bread for a man named Petersen. Defendant then appeared on the scene and said it was bie breid, Witness, who did not know defendant, asked him his name, and also stated that the bread belonged to Petersen. An argument then'ensued. Witness put the tread down on the grass, and was mounting the coaoh when he was struck twice on the mouth and once in the ear, by defendant. The only persons present at the time were two passengers on the coach. Frederick White, labourer, of Langdale, and Walter Heightou, shephard, who were passengers oa tho ooaoh, corroborated the plain- ' tiff's evidence. ; Defendant, in his evidence, said' that ha met the coach on May 22nd, ) which was a very wet dayj for the purpose of getting the bread. The ' bread was thrown off the ooaoh into a pool of water. The driver spoke very nasty and got off the ooaoh when defendant wa» walking I away. Defendant walked back, and asked the driver what he meant. MoGuirk put up his arms as though to fight, but defendant struck plaintiff three times, and then went away. After bearing further evidence, Mr James fined defendant 20s, in default one month's imprisonment. The costs amounted to £6 4s 6d. J. PAYTON AKD CO. v. J. O. COOPER. At the Masterton Magistrate's Court yesterday morning, Mr W. P. James, .S.M., delivered judgment in the case of J. Payton and Go. vi J. C. Oooper, a claim for advertising in connection with defendant's' general election campaign. After outlining the evidenoe given at the hearing of the case His Worship stated that it was evident from the defend ant's correspondence (produoed) that he was of opinion ~ that his,letter o? September 14tb, limited not only the advertisements mentioned therein to two inches, bu all future advertisements. He (the Magistrate) believed that defendant held that opinion until he was upon his own application supplied with ait copy of that letter. The letter clearly did not limit future adver- ■ tisements'to two inches. Again, tne production of the ledger, containing the account of defendant's election expenses showed that defendant was mistaken, and his memory at fault, ha having paid the account ia full, and in that aooount were Bome advertisements exceeding two' inches in length. Defendant wrote 1 to plaintiffs on October 4th instructing them to copy an advertisement appearing in the "Wairarapa Age" announcing defendant's meetings at Whakataki and Tenui. The advertisement referred to in the "Age" was three inuhes. Defendant said he sent Mr Bennett to the plaintiff's office to draw attention to the fact that the advertisements that were being inserted Were exceeding the trrangecient agreed upoq. Mr Bennett was unable to state positively what was contained in a memo defendant gave him, whether two or three inohes was mentioned but he admitted that Mr Hounelow made a memo at the time, and Mr Hounalow produoed, the memo whioh he swore was made at the time. The contents of the memo were to keep all the advertisements to three inches. If the instructions had been to keep the advertisements to two inches he (the Magistrate) should have expected, after suoh instructions that future advertisements would have been kept down to two inohes but instead another advertisement of three inches appeared on the same day and again on November 23rd. Defendant said be gave implicit instructions himself to Mr Green to keep all advertisements to two inches. This is denied bv the latter. Defendant had failed to prove any speoial contiaot, and judgment would be given for plaintiffs for the amount claimed, £29 12s?, with costs £5 13s.