R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, 20 October 1882, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

MASTERTON, THURSDAY.

[Before H. S. Warpell, R.M,]

J. Quigley v E. Green.-Debt Mr Bonny forlplaintiff, Mr Sandilands for defendant.

John Quigley, a laborer residing at Mosterton, called, said he had some convetsation with Green on the 21st of September about the leasing of a home and land of his. He. was working in his garden at the time, and Green- told him he was sent by a man named Walsh. He showed him tho house and ground, with which he expressed himself satisfied, there being plenty of grass for hi> cattle, but the house was rather small and he thought the addition of two moms would make it much more comfortable, to which he (Quigley) agreed, and said he would allow him £6 for purchasing the timber, Green finding all the labor. The price agreed upon was 10s a week for two years. After Green had been in possession a week he came to him and told him the honse did not suit, and he should be obliged to give it up, but as he did not think he could leave on such-short notice he would stop another week, which he did, and paid him the rent and gave uu the key. When questioned about the two years' lease he said he did not take it for two years, only as a weekly tenant. He had incurredconsiderableexpanse through moving backward and forward, but could not say exactly how much, but his wife could tell as she paid the bills. He had had no opportunity of letting the house since,

To Mr Sandilands: There was to have been a written agreement as soon as everything was settled. The reason Green gave for leaving the hpasp was because the chimney smoked, but thought that if some elder trees which grew along, side of the house were cut down it would remedy it, and he (Quigley) helped him to cut them down. Both Green and his wife told him after the trees had been out down that the chimney did not smoke so much, One acre and one rood of the land belonged to him, and the rest was on lease which expired in April twelvemonth.' He bad the lease for two years (six months of which had expired) with the rieht of renewing it for another year if he choso To Mr Bunny: Witness was prepared to carry out his part of the contract, Catherine QuUley, the wife of the plaintiff, was then called, and said she I was out nursing at the time Green asked' her about the house and wanted- to know if lie could have it on Friday, but she' told him he could nqt, buf cqnld have it I

on Saturday evening. On the Saturday allowing Green came to her to pay the wnt, and she told him to iseo her husband as Bheknew nothing about the agreement. The expense they were nut to in moving was; 8a the first time and 9» the second, besides 9j 6d for firewood which they had to buy at the present place at which they were living, but not before, as they had plenty of jjood firewood on the ground. Mr Sandilands submitted that the agreement ought to have been in writing instead of only a verbal one. His defence was that Green had not taken the place for two years only by the week, Ho would ask that the case be adjourned to enable him to produce witnesses' defence. The Court thought it would be better to conclude the case as soon as possible a» an adjournment would only cause a jbt of unnecessary expense. ■' Edward Green, the 'defendant, was then put in the box, and gave evidence of a very contradictory character* to that already given. JPlf His Worship, in giving }V%, said it was a very,, difficult thinlEjr him to decide in a case where the "entice was of so contradictory'a nature. Eie would, however, give judgment for plaintiff for the week's rent he lost, 10s; cost of removal, 15s; and costs of court. F, G. Moore v J. Morrison,,—Arrears of rabbit rates, LI Is 9d. Order made for payment of rates and costs of Court. Nelly Parish, alius the Woodpecker, appeared to answer to a charge oi malicious injury to property by breaking four panes of glass, the property of Mi Thompson of the Taueru. The prosecutor was not present whe<t the case was called, but the accused simplified matters by pleading guilty, and was ordered to pay fine, 53; mending broken glass, 8s; and costs, 7s, or in default forty-eight hours imprisonment, Moore v Jewell and Gould.—Bates £5 sa. Judgement for amount and costs.

THIS DAY.

Stone v Billiugton-Claim U 10s, Mr Parker for plaintiff, and Mr Beard for defendant.

This case was adjourned on completion of plaintiffs evidence from last sitting, Joseph Billingion, defendant, deposed that he changed pus for trees with the defendant. He took twelve apple trees, and ordered another three dozen of the same kind from plaintiff. The plaintiff engaged to supply him with, three dozen apples on blight proof stocks. Subsequently plaintiff told him that he could not get the apples bat could supply cherries, plums, nectarines, and apricots. Witness said he would not object to a few nectarines and apricots, but he would not take either cherries or plums on account ol the birds destroying them. Witness went down to the plaintiffs . nursery and saw there three bundles of trees, he was told, were for him, He picked out the apricots and nectarines, / but rejected the plumsi and cherries', ■ Afterwards the plaintiff sent him the trees \ that ho rejected. Witness offered payment for a dozen and a half of trees which he took, but the money was refused. T« Mr Parker: Ho was sure he ordered apple trees aqd not mixed trees, George Qrou«h«uJ deposed that he examined the trees lying at Mr Billington's and found them to consist of two quinces, onemnlbery, four pears, three chenies, and eight plurrß, The Court, in giving judgment, commented on the fact that twenty pages of its notes had been taken up to determine the simple question whether the order given was for three dozen apple trees or three dozen mixed trees. The evident"., on this point was contradictory, but At ' observations had led it to the that the most reliable evidence was (he earliest, viz., that which was given before a witness had become embarrassed under the influeuce of counsel. In the present case David Stone, the son of the plaintiff, when first -questioned said Billiogton ordered another three dozen of trees, having previously been supplied with a dozen apple trees. Subsequently David Stone qualified this statement, but the Court accepted it as correct, and 6a'v no inconsistency between the defendant's statement on this point and his conduct. The error had prabably arisen from the vagueness of tho expressions used, and furnished another argument in favor of agreements being reduced to writing. Judgment was given against plaintiff with coats—L2l4s.