Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Tuesday, December 17

(Before Joseph Grilea. Esq., K.M.) Carupkin v. Wilson and another.— Mr Jb'isher for defendants. Claim of £2O, for damages alleged to have been committed by the trespass of defendant's cattle on growing crops at Beaton's Creek. Plaintiff as the lessee of an agricultural area of 62 acres, had planted a portion of the ground with oats, potatoes, and garden crops ; such land being partly enclosed with a Maori fence, but on one side open to the bush. Defendant's cattle had at various times broken through the fence or got in on the unprotected side, and, plaintiff had discovered two young cows, the property of defendants, on a certain morning, among the crop?, where they had been all night, committing damage which he estimated at £2O.

R. McDowell gave evidence as to having assisted to turn the cows out, and as to the damage done, which he estimated at £l4.

James E. Phillpot gave corroborative evidence.

Mr Fisher submitted that the plaintiff could not legally bring an action for trespass on unenclosed land, he having failed to observe the provisions of the Cattle Trespass Ordinance, in advertising for four successive weeks, his intention to claim damages. The plaintiff produced a copy of the ' Westport Times,' wherein he had,

some twelve mouths previously, in his own and then partners name, advertised his intention to claim damages, and said that the notice had appeared three times altogether. Nonsuited, defendants being allowed costs of Court and Counsel's fee.

E J, Long v. Thomas Jones—Claim for £8 on dishonored order. Debt not admitted. Plaintiff had formerly been indebted to defendant in the sum of £3, and iu payment had given him an order on the Survey Department for £G, on the understanding that, when cashed, defendant Bhould send him the balance of £3. In lieu thereof defendant sent another order to be paid by a party owing him money, but the plaintiff had been unable to get it cashed, and now sought to re* cover the amount. Defendant pleaded that the order had been kept by plaintiff until the party upon whom it was drawn had sought protection in the Insolvent Court, and that he had hence lost the chance of recovery. Judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed and costs.

Patrick Elannigan v. John Kiornan.—Ellen Flannigan, wife of plaintiff, laid claim for damages alleged as having been committed by defendant, who, she said, had broken into her house, assaulted her and another woman, and also a man present, broke her crockery and done other damage. Cross-examined by defendant—You never knocked at the door but came in by force. There was not a little sup of grog going in the house that night, only some beer. Was not in a horizontal position on the floor when you came in. Mrs Gething the other woman present, was drunk. Tou did not shout for me and the Maori Chief. You have since mended the door, but never offered to pay for the other damage. I have not had a stifiener of grog with you since, either in your own house or on the beach. Thomas Tait said he was present when the door of the house was violently opened by defendant, who instantly afterwards assaulted witness ; stunning him so that he saw and heard nothing of the after occurrence. Theresa Gething contradicted plaintiff's evidence as to the breaking of crockery and the other damage alleged. Another witness stated that the door was roughly made of waste wood, and was worth perhaps five shillings. Defendant, pleaded that the witness Grething was under his protection, and that he had chastised her for being in bad company. The Court ruled that a trespass had beee committed, and gave judgment for £1 and costs. W. Mailer v. E. Fox.—Claim for £1 15s, goods sold. Judgment by default for full amount and costs. Walter Layette v. Sarah Burrows.— Claim for £2 10s. Judgment by default, with costs.

Same v. Levi.—Claim for £1 8s 4d. No appearauce of defendant. Judgment for amount claimed and costs, less £l, paid since service of summons.

Same v. Cuthbertson. —Judgment confessed. Order for payment by instalments.

Since the previous Court, held on the 10th instant, lines were indicted on the following parties:—For drunkenness, Charles Jones, 20s, and Ann Connelly, 10s and costs; for assault, W. Meredith, os and costs.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WEST18721220.2.7

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Westport Times, Volume VI, Issue 1031, 20 December 1872, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
727

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT. Westport Times, Volume VI, Issue 1031, 20 December 1872, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT. Westport Times, Volume VI, Issue 1031, 20 December 1872, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert