R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume X, Issue 3106, 17 January 1889, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

MASTERTON—THURSDAY. (Before S. Yon-Stunner, R.M,) V ROBBINO AN OIIOUARD, " ' Edwin Holmntj a small boy aged 11 years, was charged with stealing apples from the orchard of A.;,W. Renall, value 2s. Ordered to bo imprisoned for ; two hours in the police cells, his father to punish hiiii afterwards. BREACH OF THE RABBIT ACT,' John Druuimond v Oswald S. Brodie.' Failing to destroy, rabbits.! Accused pleaded guilty. : Inspector; Druminond said he did not wish to press for anything moro than,-the minimum penalty provided the acoused took steps at once to destroy the rabbits. Accused stated that he had already commenced such steps. • :: Fined 20a"and costs lis, :'■■ , Same v. Herbert S. Wurdoll, ,No appearance of defendant. 1 ; • • ; Inspector John' Drummoiid deposed that he visited the property of defendant, and was not satisfied with the Steps taken to [clear the rtin of rabbits. Defendant had promised to take moro effioient measures,'. The 'minimum, penalty .was inflicted of 203 and losts. Same v T. Brown same offence. Fined 20s and costs I.ls,

/' .NEW YEAR S.EVE SPORTS. '< Constable Cooper v John McCalmont and William Thomas, charged with doing injury to on the' morning of January Ist, the property of Edward Braggins,

: Polico Oouatable Thomas Cooper deposed that he was on duty on the 1 night in question. He saw MeCalinont ono of tho accused on the night in' 'question, about; 130 yards ?off; about live or six ran away from Braggin's premises. Accused ran up to tho fence where witness stood, and tho the watchman, turned on his lantern when he recognised accused. To accused:; You sere standing when I saw. you. ; I did not seo you on the premises where thedamage was done;

. To the i Court: I did not see the accused running. There were a number.of others six or eight at least. He said nothing to accused at the time. Edward Braggins, night-watchman deposed that he was on duty on the night of tho Ist inst. Was in company of last • witness, and hcurd a crashing uoise. Saw several figures running away. Turned his light on and saw defendant standing against the fence, Cooper made a grab at one of the persons, biit mfced him,

Found that his closet was overturned. Did not see the other

accused. To accused; I saw you walking to the fence with three or four others, At this stage the Court asked the Sergeant if he had any moro witnesses, Sergfc. Price:" No it'our Worship. The Court : Thomas you are discharged. . His Worship said lie did notseewhy an information should have been laid against Thomas at all. No witness had been brought against him, and it was very cruel for a:man to be brought up on a charge of this sort on hearsay evidence.,

His Worship, considering the evidence against M'Calmont insufficient, discharged tbe accused. TRESPASSING OH THE RAILWAY LINE. Sergeant Price v, Willium Everett. Dofendunt was charged with attempting to cross the line while the train was approaching, Mr Everett explained the circumstances. His Worship said he thought tho fact of defendant's horse having been destroyed and hi" own life having been endangered would be caution enough for him. in future. Tho penalty was as high as £SO, but taking defendant's loss into consideration he would inflict a penalty of Is only. FAILING TO COMPLY WITH ORDER OP THE COORT. . Mary Gillespie v. William Gilkspio. Accused was charged with failing to comply with an order cf tho Court to contribute 2os per week for the support of his wife and children. Mr Skipper for c implainaufc, Accused pleaded inability to comply with the order.

Mary Gillespie sworn, said she had received no money from her husband since October 4th, The only tiling he hadseiit was "half a quarter of a pound of butter three mouths.old, that he sent in to her' by one of the children," Tho accused had no questions to ask nor anything to say t® the Court. The Court said directly the order was made it appeared 'apouged had wilfully deserted his wife and failed to contribute anything towards her support, He would have to find one surety for six months, to comply with the order failing which ho would he imprisoned in tho Terrace Gaol for two months with hard labor. uira OASES. Several debt cases wero settled out of.Court or confessed. Lowes i lorr.s v William McKillop goods supplied £6 8s 6d and interest 10s 2d. No appearance of defendant. Judgment'for amount claimed and Court costs 10s. •

Harcourt Co v Ralph Manning, debt £1 6s 4d, No appearance of defendant, Judgment for amount Hiid costs £2 Is.'

Robert Campbell v -Kanganu Kingi, claim for promissory note ant 6s 4d interest thereon, No appear, ance of defendant, Mr Skipper foi plaintiff. Judgment for'amount and costs £2

His Worship pointed out that all transactionsof the present kind should have a translation written oil the back in Maori..

Arthur R. Bunny v Frank Mag. nusen, debt £2 2s, No appearance of dofendant. Judgment for amount and costs 6s. , • ( Muir and Dixon v John Vile, senr olairii £l. No appearance of defendant Mr dkipper for plaintiffs, Judgment for amount and costs 19s. Henry Eton v Robert McOuliocb. Goods supplied 7s. Defendant pleaded not indebted. Plaintiff deposed that the goods, two bottles of mixture, were supplied and Bent away by coach to defendant.' Dr Milne told him to supply them and collect the money from defendant, To defendantl would not take an oath that it was nob paid,; 1 - - Defendant produced a receipted account, proving tlio money was paid, and stated that "he sent a message by the mailman when he brought an account to him from plaintiff, that it, was paid. The message returned was that" he was a liar, it was not paid." Tbe case was dismissed, and plaintiff ordered to pay defendant's expenses from Tinui, 30s, and two days' work at 8s a day, making a total of £2 6s. ■ - -

, Smith and Hog" v. Frank Magnusen, .Balance .of account ills. .Judgmeht summons. 1 , v

Mr Poß'iwll for plaintiffs. Ordered to;;be paid: within 21 days or : soveod:iys; impviconment." • ''