R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 5, Issue 1434, 19 July 1883, Page 3

R.M. COURT.

CARTURTON-WEDNESDAt

fßefoio lfi S. Wakuelij, 'B.M. |

Suttoii v I. of Babbit Nuisance Act,' Section .: :9, failing to tako officient steps to.destroy rabbits, Fined ; £1 and'cbsts.'' ' !il r{ :

1 'Same v Wyot offence, 1 Section 10, haying rabbits on his land. Second information, ded ho was not ; the person to be. sued,. The case was adjoin'rieil io, the.. Ji'eit sitting at. Masterton.,. ■,' , ~.-'■

Cokpr. V.Thomas Bennett.—Debt £3. Judgments amount and costs'£l, 6s, ;|

W. Morris vL. Nix—Debt .£5 6s 9d, Mr Beard for plaintiff/MrSalidilands for defendant, Judgment fbr,'£i 12s Gd and costs £2 10s. ' ' l ' k-a"

. John Burrow v Margaret and Alexander Grant, executors late JR.;Grant.' Disputed half share in a wool press, amount £lO. Judgment reserved.'"."

MASTERTON-THURSDAY.

Charles Forsberg ,v James Cashman. —Debt £sl3s, Judgment for jtmou'ilf; and costs, j . . .

J. H.Corbott v E, Osgood-Debt. £2 10s, Judgment,for amount and COStS.' ;■•■„■• . , , ~

D. F. McCarthy v John Sunnex Debt £23105., Judgment for amount 1 ! and c05t5........ ,

Ingram v G. Harvey—Leaving a vehicle in the public streets unattended.'

Defendant pleaded that he was not in charge of tho vehicle. Informant deposed that the vehicle '■■ with a pair of horses stood in the street for an hour unattended, and. that defendant admitted that the .vehicle belonged to him, ', William Harvey deposed' that he 1 was in charge of the vehicle referredto.

■The Court dismissed the information, and. ordered a fresh one to be laid against William Harvey, who Was fined ten shillings, without costs ' CATCHING A TARTAR, ' : .J Ingram vW. G. Beard.—Allowing a chimney to catch on firo. , Defendant admitted the fact that the chimney was on fire, but questioned whether the offence in the information came under the by-law. Ho Was willing for the informant to amend the information by inserting the word :" negligently." i ■-■ !:.,:•;: The information was amended as suggested. ■ :r. ~■. :

Informant: I call Police Constable Leahy.

Defendant: There is no occasion, to call the Constable .unless lie weht'up the chimney.. I admit it was oivfire.

The Court commented .on-; the fact that the information was not 'laid in the terms of the by-law. The; negligence must be assumed from jthe fact,; that the chimney, was on fire, '■■ ■'■ •"■'■>•• Defendant thought that negligence should be proved, not assumed.! "'"' j The informant pointed out that negligence arose from not haying the chimney swept,often enough, j- '' ■ The defendant: "You can'calHlie" sweep if you like.- My object; in call*, ing attention to this case is that;.,we are 1 at the mercy "of tlie Borough Council, 1 which.takes 'the fines but does not provide l that chmneys are properly' swept or that a suitable' apparatus is, used." He attributed tho fire in his chimney to inefficient sweeping: ■: He; was willing to pay the usual fine now that he had had his say. ' ' -""

The Court inflicted a fine of. ten shillings, expressing a hope that tho Borough Council Would take 'steps to regulate, sweeping, and recommendhig the informant to take advantagoof the information he had received that day as-to the proper mode of bringing his cases, before;the.'Court. : j \ j j J " Defendant: Perhaps Mr (Ingram will take my advice as a setoff against the fine. - v . , v . ; ! THE BABBIT ACT. j -'"''"''i

; Sutton v. B. ~Pi Perry, ibieaeh of Babbit Act, . Defendant pleaded not guilty. .He pointed out that through the steps he had taken within the last two years his land now carrlei double the number, of, sheop. it fprnnlly sup'-' ported. After receiving notice from,. the : Inspector he put on an extra; lhand, to destroy the rabbits. He ladiajso-

been engaged in clearing..cover.' ;• Oh one part of the land he had lain poison twelvo times. The ark of the property, was about eight or nine hundred acres. The informant said he was not satisfied with the steps taken. /'Hie land was easily cleaned. Th'e'doi'endant only worked in patches,. He could get more rnen.if he would pay tin market price for labor.

" Tho Court inflicted a; fine of £5, and CQStS. . .