R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3752, 12 March 1891, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

MASTERTON-THORSDAY.

(Before Colonel Roberta, R*M.)

Civil Cases.

E. Dixon v. S. Mahupuku.—-Claim, £lO, for ba'ance ot account owing. Judgment for amount claimed, with 10s costs. i S. F. Beard v. G. BuokinjtlufiT— Claim for professional services rendered, £8 Bs. Judgment for amount and costs, Kelliher v. Huxtable.—This waa a case adjourned from last Courljriay, in which Kelliher claimed a refund of nineteen shillings, alleged to to overpaid to the defendant in connection with his appearance as a witness in a Court case at Eketahunn. Mr Pownall appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Beard for the di>> fendant. The defendant, Bvtorn, stated the circumstances under which he had appeared as a witness at Eketahunn. Mr Pownall had guaranteed his expenses, lie had proceeded to Ekotahuna and found thejjjte adjourned till next sitting. He hud received no intimation of this. As he had to remain in Eketahuna all night he incurred an expense of 4s Od. flia expense for two days was £1 9s 4d. Mr Kelliher had paid him £l, and said he would not bo particular as to 10s. Told hiru bis charges wore 16s' lOd eaoh day. The defendant having been crossexamined by Mr Pownall, Mr Beard contended that the cose was praoti* cally one of obtaining money under false pretences. It was on this point the Court had to decide. '-;! Decision in the case wns adjourned till two o'clock.

B. Eagle v. H. Vile. Claim, 15s, for expenses as a witness. Mr Beard for plaintiff, Mr Pownall for defendant.

Henry Eagle, sworn, stated he was claiming 15s for his expenses in a oaso Vile v. Halberg. He had been Bubpoaned as a witness, bat had lost the subpoena. He bad been allowed ' 15a expenses by the Court. He bad applied to the defendant for payment, but had not received the same.

Cross-examined by Mr Pownall: Had never been paid money through' Mr Gawith. The defendant had offered to pay him £ls 5s through Mr Ellis. In an account rendered the amount for expenses was included, The defendant had said the' amount (fifteen shillings) was in Mr Beard's hands, but he had found this was nob so. Mr Gawith had no authority to receive the money on his behalf. Ha had given a receipt for the £ls ss, and had not excepted the fifteen shillings. By Mr Beard : At the time he signed the receipt tho defendant said the fifteen shillings was in Mr Beard's hande.

W.'G. Beard, sworn, stated that the defendant had been paid a lesser amount of tbe judgment, together with coßts and witnesses' expenses. The defendant had to settle with witnesses out of the amount received. For the defence Mr Pownall stated that he would show the amount had been paid. Henry Vile, sworn, stated that ho did not know whether or not the ; amount sent to him included 'the witnesses expenses, Had told Eagle he believed the 15s to be in Mr Beard's hands. Plaintiff had rendered lriCi an account ot monies alleged to have been owing, He did not know whether the 15s was included in this account. He had a settlement with 1 Eagle in Mr Gawith's office on 10th November, and had received a clear receipt for all amounts owing. By Mr Beard: Had not Baid the 15s was in Mr Beard's hands after the settlement. He had never been applied to for the amount torJ£ Ellis. He did not know whether he"" had paid other witnesses. By Mr Pownall: The 15s was due to the plaintiff when the settlement' ' was made in November.

Judgment for plaintiff, for amount claimed, with costs, lis.

G, J. Jackson v H. Johnson. Claim, £ls 5b Sd, for work and labor done and damages for forcible entry. Mr Beard for plaintiff, Mr Pownall for defendant. The evidence in this case was the same as that given in a case in which the plaintiff was nonsuited, with the addition of that of Mrs Jackson. His Worship reserved his decision in order to look up his notes. Olifton v Parsons. -Claim for the recovery of a horse sold by the bailiff to defendant. Mr Pownall for plaintiff, Mr Beard for [Left Sitting.!