R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3431, 10 February 1890, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

EKETAHUNA-FRIDAY, (Bofore Colonel Eohorls R.M.) H.AulinvT.K.York. Judgment summons, enlarged for service. George Edwards v Maurice Kelliher. Claim £l4, balance of account due for meat supplied. Mr Pownall for plaintiff, Mr •A. W. Gould for defendant. An adjournment was granted, on the application of defendant,to the next sitting at Eketahuna, March 7th, defendant to pay costs oi adjournment £ll4s, John Brosoan v William Gleason, Claim £l9 due on contract for bush

falling. Affidavit taken in Dunedin and forwarded by defendant set forth that the particulars of demand were not explicit, no tirao nor dato being mentioned in plaint. Tho allegations were uphold by the Court. An adjournment was applied for and grantod for next sitting, A. 0. Tumor & Co v W Ponney, Judgment summons. Order made for payment within one month in dofanlt seven days imprisonment, D. Shehan vD. Braid, olaim,, £8 6s for paddocking one horse from February 1899, to September 1889, Mr Pownall for: plaintiff, Mr Gould for defendant, Plaintiff deposed that Mr Belby ocoupied the land up to February Ist, when he took over the paddock on that date, Ho taw. one horse belonging to defendant. He saw Mr William Maurice, and told him to take Mr Braid's horse away. He asked witness to let it.etap till Mr Braid, came up.; Baw. defendant on the •■; 23rd February, 1888, Qe agreed to pay 2s aweek

for; the bdi'ss for a month or two till he!coitld get soino convenient place to put it. Also leased Mr Danaher a paddock of seven acies bnaatue terms. About six months after he reqabated: defon'diuit to take his horse put* but: he dfd not. Saw defendant's horse ; there every week.' Defendant' removed his horse without giving. Mm notice, although lie had agreed to do. so. He hue?, sent several accounts.tohira, but Tie refused to pay because" «n r .printed bill head. He'did not dispute the'iteins.; He: asked .'witness. to : goto Ciittler'i'; hotel, and he would pay biro. Saw; him thero, but he did not pay becauso he had a contra account against, plaintiff. Next day he then disputed tbo account. Cross-examined: Mr Danaherbired the paddock on February hl| 7 aores, adjoining the land I rented to Mr Braid. Had seen defendant's horse in Danahor's paddock several times, There are several kinds of fouces round the paddocks. The fences were quite good onough to keep the i horses in.

1 He-examined: I have repcs% asked for contra account. Defendant's horse had the run of 48 acres, and Danaher's paddock, By tho Bench: Am certain I saw tho horse in tho paddock once a week during the time, Mr A, Selby said he knew plaintiff a : ■ paddocks. Had the lease of them up . to February I, 1888. Gave them up \ to MrShehan on that date. , Thero were two small ones and a large one. Mr Danaher and Mr Braid both had ') horses in the paddocks. Mr DahaheV i had the small paddock, 'When I gave up the paddocks I gave notice to Mr Danaher and-Mrßraid that they would have to mate arrangements with MrShehan, Mr H. ;..Coraeli.il9,jContraotor, Pahiatna, said he knew the paddock of "Mr Bhehan's. Saw ahorsetlwre" pointed out to him as Mr Braid's on and before the first of April; . _ Cross-examined: Waß at Masterton oh 2nd February. On the road down 1 stopped at plaintiff's place. Am certain of the date,. >'\ .. ■•-,'>.. i F. C. Turnor,' called,'said ho knew Mr Shehan's paddock, Informed Mr , Braid that he had given up possession i on the Ist February. Knew Mr t Braid's horse. Mi Braid was told to '. make bis own arrangements with Mr i Shohan. Mr. Braid fltilhkept.hjsy t horse in the paddock'until ho gave up;"' r tho.store in 1889, Sawthchoraeoor I June in the plaintiff's paddock. j ' Cross-examined : Am living closo t to the plaintiffs paddock, j James Thompson, labourer,' Waiv waka, said he knew Mr Binid's s hoi'Bo, Have seen the. horse in o Bhehan's paddock. Have seen tho e borse repeatedly in all the paddocks ,f before and after Braid,gave up the d Btore.

Ke-examined: I saw Mr Maurice, Braid's man turn'the horsoin'totho "'.' paddock. A. Sorensen also gave corroborative evidence, David Braid, defendant, said: I admit for part of the time and part of the disputed timo Mr.Danaher ronted the paddock, and 1 am responsible to.' him, 1 agreed to give plaintiff 2s per week' sometime in February, 1888, The paddock at that time was all in one. In February the fences, were '■ mended and my man put tho hone in the small paddook occupied by Mr Danaher. Wbon tho latter gave up the paddock my hone was put in. the. big paddook. ' :: Oiosa-examiued: I got. the Gist account on February sth, 1889, £5 4s. I disputed the account then, I still let my horse run, I had a contra account of £l3s, I could not swear that ray man did not put my horso in Mr Shehau's paddook. By tho Bench:'l paid to Tumor and Co, up to February 6th. About the middle of February I made the agreement with plaintiff for 2s perl week, .

Jobn Reardon, contraotor, said : I was. foreman for Mr Danaher. I know Braid's torso.. I know that Mr Danaher had some land fronVMr Shehan from let February to 30th September. Mr Danaher told Mr Braid that ho could: put his hofsejn his paddock in place of paying Mr Bbeban. Fred Coleman, labourer, said: I looked after Mr Danaher's horses. Mr Braid also bad ahorse there from the beginning of February to the end of September. Mr Danaher told roe to look after Mr Braid's horse with thereat. \ ■/ William Maurice, labourer, Masterton, Bttid: I was working for Mr Braid at Waiwaka.. Was always told to put the horse in the small paddock, mid did so all tho time I was thero. Judgmont for plaintiff £3 6s, costs £32s. ■■•■ The Sweating Commission. • Dbxedin; Monday. ' At tho Sweating Commission sitting to-day, Mr Hansen, Inspector of faotovies was the first witness. It was officially stated no calls had beon made to tho Legislative Council this recess/ ; ! A New Enoch Men. •

Considerable excitement prevailed .inGreenwich and Deptford on Sunday and on Saturday, Decembor ,1 and 2 in consequence of the unexpected reappearance of a man believed to i have been drowned at eon thirty yearn ago. Tho man in question,'-William ■ Henry Parker,' arriyod in >Englaad : , two or threo weeks previously, aud had since been busily engaged in /9 searching for his wife. On Saturday ho Bucceededin discoveringher where- • abouts, only to find, however, that she, believing him dead, had married a respeotablo mechanic, and was tho • • mother of a grown up family, As may readily be imagined, his unexpected appearance in the family cirolo created a great amount of con •■ sternatioiv His ..wife, ; iiotwithstarid ■'■'- ing the lapse of years, rocognißsd him immediately, both by his voice and personal appearance. It appears that in. the spring of 1857; 'Parksr. ■ shipped in a vessel called tho William . and Mary as a common Beaman for Quebec. On the return journey in the month of August of that year Parker one evening; was observed jf-o 1! : to fall overboard. Boats wero lower s& and every effort niado to savo him, but he could not be found, and it was folly believod he was drowned. Tlia captain, on the arrival of the vessel in London, reported his death, and ; his supposed widow mourned for hiin. as dead, two years afterwards marrying a brass-finisher, with whoa sheia now living in East Greenwich, and by whom' she has a family of firo grown up sons. Parker states that on the night ho fell ovorboard he drifted some distance from the vessel before' tho William and Mary could lower'her boats, and was finally picked up by a Portuguese vesiiel bound for South America, whero 'ha was. landed. He has had an adventuroup career, at one period being

forced into tho servicin of a pirate. At another time he was unconscious or delirious with tho fever at Pulormo no one knowing who or what he was, wbilo yot on another occasion he was taken prisoner in tho American civil war while running tho blockade with provisions, for tho South, Ho found his way to the goldfields, and is now worth a fair amount of .money. Parker gives no explanation of his failure tocommunicale with England, He believes that his wife has been happy with her second husband. A solicitor, it is reported, has been instructed to make some amicable' Arrangement in this strange affair.