Magistrates' Court. (Before Major Keddell, S.M.) Thursday, April 27. (TO THE EDITOR.)

Waimate Daily Advertiser, Issue 49, 29 April 1899, Page 2

Magistrates' Court. (Before Major Keddell, S.M.) Thursday, April 27.

(TO THE EDITOR.)

T Simpson was chained with drunkenness, in Queen stieet on Apnl 2bth, and was lined ss.

SvUNT>r,RS Y. W\KE. In giving his decision the Magistiate tenants should onlj make miv use of then landloirts' propeitv. In this case the damage was not undictis'e and the evidence oi the plaintifl showed that theie was no rlaninpe at all, he was getting the same lent as paid l>y defendant. Veidict was for defendant with costs £6 Is 6d.

MILSOM Y. Fl,nSIT>'G. Evidence in this case, to be heaid in Dnnedin, was not to hand, and hearing washell oveitill next conit day, 11th May. Thomas Walker v Fiank Narby, claim £5 10s, lent of ]and. Judgment foi amount with 10s costs. Two applications foi old age pensions weie heaid, and adjourned tor \>ant of evidence.

Sir,— Tin! v law is like many other things in life, vei v much of a lottery. You can know v. hat it costs to stait an action, but till the final result is known it is no use even trying to guess how yon will stand at the finish. The plaintiff in an action heard bafoie the S.M. a foitiught ago. m winch the decision was gi\ en on. Thursday last, kno vs all about it new. Tnc said plamtiif is the owner of the pioperty, section and house, uhich he rented to another man at 8s a week. Theie aid on the section a number of trees, usciul and ornamental. One of the killer, some 15 yetus old, growing ia front ot the house, the tenant cut down as he conpideied it daikened one of the 100ms. Scne months afters aids Uie tenant If it, and the LmdJoid who had been ill had not seen the property since the tree vhi cut down. Becoming aw. ire of what h.ul been done the landlord sued the e.\ tenant for 1:5, the amount ot damage he considered had been done to his propeit,\. The tenant in response paid into comb ]0s and costs, as shown on the summons. On the face ot ifc. to oidinarv people, this looked hke an acknowledgement I>\ the tenant tliat the piopeit,\ had sustained damage to the extent of 10s. As against the claim for £5, it was proved that the propei ty is &t-ill bunging m the &aine irnt as foimeily, and on this giound tho Magistiate decided no damage had bei- i done, and gave ]udgment for the defoi d ant with costs £'o. There is not much m the contention on which the decision h founded; for a difference of 15 on t) & vahe of a property woith would not make any appieciable diffeience to the weekly lent. According to this decision, so long as the letting value of a pi opeity is not affected a tenant may take what liberties he hkes with it. If tins is law then it is another illu&tiaLon of the finingthat law and common-sense me cot necessarily the same thing — I am. e!c, X.'i Z.