R.M.COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XIII, Issue 4294, 14 December 1892, Page 2

R.M.COURT.

OARTERTON.-TUESDAY,

(Before Colonel Roberts, R.M., and Messrs James Bayliss and A, Booth, J.P.'a.) BABBIT NUISANCE, James Harvey, Bubbit Inspector, v \V. B. Allen, owner of the Admiral run. Charged with failing to use sufficient means to destroy tbo rab« bits on the said run, Mr Bunny for complainant. The defendant pleaded guilty. Fined 20a with Win. Downard y Alex. MoKenzio, Claim L 7 2s. Judgment by default with costs 21s. •Wm Hercock v Ohas. Wright, Mr Aeheson for plaintiff, -Mr Middleton for defendant, Claim L 8 0s 4d. Case' adjourned till the 10th January 1898. Mrs MoKenzie v, Riohard Goodin, Mr Beard, for plaintiff. Claim L4Bs 2d. Judgment by default, with costs Bs, solicitor's foe 21b, ALLEGED PERJURY, (Before Messrs Jas, Bayliss and A, Booth.) Wm. Cadwallader v Owen Oadwallader. Mr Aohcson for prosecutor Mr Beard for defendant. This was a oase in which the defendant was oharged with that ha did, in giving evidence as plaintiff against the present prosecutor, at the last sitting of the Court at' Carterton, commit wilful and corrupt perjury in respect to not having received a cheque for £3 from the present prosocutor in part payment of monies due. Robt, Darby, Clerk of the R.M. Uourt, Carterton, deposed: I know the prosecutor. I also know the accused. Ho was the plaintiff in the late action agaiuattho present prosecutor (the plaint book was hero produced showing the late. plaint). The accused gave evidence. The ■ oath was administered by myself to 1 him in the usual form,

John M, Roborta deposed: I am the Resident Magistrate for the district of the Wairarapa; I held a sitting of the Court on the- 29th Nov. last at Carterton, in"which "the accused was a pluintiff in'a oivil case against the presont prosecutor, the accused gave evidence in that caso on oath. The oath was administered by the Olerk of the Court. My notes taken at the time will prove the state-' men tot the then plaintiff as to certain cheques in dispute between himself and the then .defendant, to the best of my recolleotion the cheque for £3 (which, is the cause of the present action) the then'defehi dant denied haviug received. By Mr Beard; There was several exhibits put in at the previous hearing in a civil action taken by the present aooused. I knew that the informant and the accused were brothers. There was no set off put in by the defendant in the civil case, bat there were several cheques put in. I am not prepared to state that a cheque for U 108 waß made up from two acoounts,

By Mr Acheson; The accused refused to give oiedit for the £8 cheque now produced, alleging that he had not received it, I do not remember how the £4los was made up, but I think it had something to do with Buokoridge. Wro, Cadwallader,deposed: lam prosecutor in this case, I remember the 29th of last month, I was sued by the defendant in this Court, I was present whoii he (he. then plaintiff) gave his evidence. I remember his denying having received tho oheque I for £3.

By Mr Beard: The accused and I are brothers. I am trying to get bim committed for trial in acase of perjury. I did not tell my brother Joseph to gc and arrange this matter with Mr Aobeson, I did not tell him the matter was out of my hands &b I bad paid Mr Acheson a certain amount to prosecute the case. I did not see my wife hand the cheque to my bro* ther (the aooused), but he told me afterwards that be received it. lam not in the habit of writing out cheques in favour of other people and gashing them myself. I have never asked Peyton to make out a cheque in another person's name to get cashed for myself, By Mr Acheson: The accused was asked several times about tho cheque, and was told to pay particular attention.

Eliza Cadwallador, wife of the prosecuior, doposed: 1 know Arthur Oadwallader, tho acoused. I paid bim a cheque for £8 which had been drawn by my husband in hia (the accused's) favour. It was on the 14th April last. My husband signed tha cheque in the morning beforo leaving for Wellington. I gave it to'the acoused in tho ovoning of the same day, By Mr Beard: I have not seen tho book now produced before. 0. W. Ifercook deposed: I remember oashing a oheque for the accused last April for the amount of L 3 dated 10th April. The oheque was drawn by William Cadwallader, prosecutor in the present oaee. My wife was present at the time, I believe tho cheque produced to ho the one I cashed

By Mr Beard; I cashed the cheque at my own house. I cannot say what day in tho week it was. lam brother-in-law to the Oadwalladers. The ac» CUBed went to Wellington on the 15th A pril to a football match, I had not seen the oheque since till this morning. 1 parted with, it, I cannot swear that the oheque produced is the same choquo, but I will swear it boars the same date.

Sarah Hercock, wife of the last witness, deposed; 1 know the accused, I remember him coming to ray house during the month of April last, He asked my husband to cash a, cheque. It was on'tho lfiih April ape] the amount was Lf). The' cheque was drawn by Win. Cadwallader. ■ I oannot swear that tho cheque produced is tho same it bears : tho samb dalo,' and is for the saWam'o'un.t,' ' : " : Win Mop'redeposed ; lama storekeejier of 'Cartefton, ' Duripg tlio inontfi of 'Aprij last Iqashcd a' oheqiiis forMra'C/W,' Horpopk? A) lar :, aij my recolleotjon serves me I beljove it was for L 8 and drawn, by Wm. Qaiwallader in favour of the accused, I think it was about the 18th of the „ '" r """'iHot the month as near an i »

cheque now produced is the same, _ By Mr Beard; I know both the informant and the apsei], I dorA think the accused would Bwew that he h'ad not 'received certain monies which had been paid' to him; • '■ i! Colonel Roberts, 'recalled, gave further evidence regarding the hearing of tho ease recently heard by him. ' -Aft«'Seating' legal' argument th'fi informatioli -'ty- in m ground that thove was'not SiimSiiilt gyjdeuce to go to a jury,