R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4517, 7 September 1893, Page 3

R.M. COURT.

MASTEBTON-TUUpgpAy. (Before Mr T, Hutchison, E.M.) CIVIL OABBH, L, J, Hooperand Co v, Jno Hayes, Claim £5 8s 10|d. Judgment with co.He.

Shaw v. Broadbfiit, Mr Beard for plaintiff. No appearance of defendant. Claim £3 Bs. Judgment with costs.

Gnntbcr y, Wayland, Mr Pownall for plaintiff. Claim £1 for board ant] lodging, Judgment with costs, L, J. Hooper and Co v. Fairburn, Claim il 178 7jd. Mr Jackson appeared for defenuaut and produced certain receipts. Mr L. J. Hooper admitted that the initials on a stamp on one of them were his initials, but swore thnt the stamp had never been affixed by him, and must havobcen , taken front some othof document, Ho had never received payment of the amount. The Bench ruled that the document before the Court was not a receipt, It merely had a stamp on "it with initials and a date, Mr Jackson applied for a dismissal on a technical irregularity in the summons. The Bench disallowed tlieol jeel ion, John Fairburn on oath swore ihtt Mr Hooper stamped the occoun l , 11 was tbe only account ho ever got from Mr Hooper, By Mr Hooper;— Had nevor Bent an account in for lour days labour. Had never received a receipt for the work done. Had called at Mr Hooper's house one evening and they bad gone together to the shop when Mr Hooper gave tbo reeeipt produced, Mr Hooper said tlio statements made by aitness were absolutely false, The Bench asked Mr Hooper if he had books to show the payment to Miami, On Mr Honper producing bis hooks it was seen thai tlio on try of the payment undo and the dute on the sbmp were the same. His Worship said it seemed to him tliiit Mr Hooper had made his case clear and he should give judgement for the amount claimed. {

Mr Hooper askod the Court to impound the stamped document as ii was probuble he should take action against Fairlium for perjury. His Worship said he was not sure tlmt he had power to do so,. but should certainly impound the document, if ho could do so, .Fowler v. Pelling, Mr Jackson for plantiff, Mr Pownall for defendant,

Edwin Fowler, carpenter, residing at JiltßtaliUDO, remembered receiving 11 cheque from Mr A. Yule for £l4 10s, in the year 18D1 on the 13th of July. Went to Pulliitg's hotel and asked Mi's Pelling to cash the oheqne. T|ie cheque produced was the one ho gave lira Felling, who at the time gave witness one pound, and said ehe would Band down and get it cashed in the morning. Saw Mr Pelting next day, who said they had not i?ot a reply. The cheque was sent; to Mas terton. . Some days after he asked Mrs Pelling again about the cheque, and was " put off." Stayed in tho house about four weeks, at the end of i which time he went away from tho hotel to work, and returned nt the end of a. month and stayed two nights, ■Subsequently Pelling appjied for payment for his hoard and-" witness said lie did not reckon 'ho owed Pelling anything. •Was summonsed in'i February last, Pelling jit that time on oath gave evidence that ho bad never reeeived the cheque from witness and that he (Fowler) came to the hotel liard-up and owed him money, Mrs Polling who was nleo a witness swore that she never had a cheque from Witness for £UlOs. Judgmont was given against witness and in due time a judgment summons waa issued, At that time Pelling first said he would drop the oase, and then said he wo'ald iet it taiie itscourßß* Wouldnow swear positively that he had never received the amount of the oheque with exception of one pitthd, ;

ByMrPownall: Did not know why the £1 was notsummons. Had defended the oase on the grounds that the payment- of the cheque-was in oxcesS of the amount due to Pelliiig, The 11. M, had given judgment against witness., r Ji Polling had not issued the judgiient sutrimtflis would never have troubled to, bring tliisclium.against him,: Had been in Eketabuna about'an-hour when he got tho pound change, and had been drinking afterwards ..pretty hard in Borne of the other houses. H«d paid 60s to Mrs Polling since tlie oco'ision, of the cheque. . By Mr Jackson ; Bbarded several wenks after the cheque was changed, When lie came to Gkiitahuna he was perfectly sober. Came from Hawera and had been drinking slightly, there. , r-':'

For the defence Mr Pownall asked, for a nonsuit. The om was ofa kind that the Court tliould not encourage. After argument Hiß Worship said that so far as the caso had gone, the evidence of the plaintiff itself proved i hat there was an estoppel. The judgment given by Colonel BobertSi tUI., held good, and plaintiff would be nonsuited with costs, 'J lie Court then adjourned,