R. M. COURT, HAMILTON.

Waikato Times, Volume X, Issue 746, 29 March 1877, Page 2

R. M. COURT, HAMILTON.

(Before W. N. Searanoke, Esq., R.M.)

March 24, 1877.

William Walker v Nat&an Harvey.— Claim, £1 5s 6d. Mr Wnitaker for plaintiff This was a claim for debt to the amount claimed by Mr Walker, of the Commercial Hotel, Hamilton, and was undefended. Judgement for plain* tiff, £1 5s 6J, with costs, £1 10s 6d. JG Jackson vC E Maiden. — Claim, £10 10a Sd, the amouut of an 1.0. U. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs, 20s. ' Albert Folter v John Haukett. — Claim, £12 12s 41. Defendant had filed a set off lor £7,- and had paid £6 6* 4d into Court.

Mr Whi taker appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Hay for defendant. Albert Potter, sworn, stated that he was a butcher m Hamilton East. I was not m the habit of buyiog cattle from defendant. I cannot remember that I ever bought any cattle from him, at least, since A ugust, 1875 Oa the 20th, or 24th of February, defendant paid me some money, aud left a balance of £10 7s 3d. Ho asked me to allow him for a buttock, which my son went to see, but declined to buy, as it was a Btag. I said that I would Bee the bullock. ' On two previous occasions he spoke to mo about a bullock. My son drove it along with two others, belonging to the defendant, as far as Oapt. Steele's corner, and left it. The ( bullock was brought to show me. Ebenezer Potter, son of last witness, deposed that be knew the bullock, the subject of the action. He only Saw it once, wh-n he went to look at it at Leslies. This was about a month ago. He told defendant that it wm not worth

«£

the money, or fit to sell. Defendant told me I had better take it to my father, and leave it to ha. I wan then not far from Qr*h»m'e, with my hrother. .We drove the Wllook as far as Ca^t. dele's Corner. We dropped the defendant* two bullocks there, and also bia bullock or stag. John Hackett, sworn, stated he was a laborer, and knew the bullock m question. Spoke to plaintiff about it. I told him him on the 20th February that he was a good bullock, worth at toast £8 lOj, but that I would take £7 for him. I assisted him to drive the bullock as far as the Tamahore bridge. Ebenezer Potter said to me on tho road, "what did you give for the bullock. I suppose, £4 or £5." I made no reply. I delivered (he bullock with three atiange oatjle. They drove them away. I aftetwards paid pluiutifi £4 ou my ace uot. He said that he would get the bullook m, and then settle about its value. The pries of the beast was a set off against my accouut due to him. I have twice asked plaintiff to square up for the bullook, but he would not. I valued the «oimal at £8 to £9 I sold him to Mr Potter, aud delivered him to his sona. To Mr Whitaker— l sold the tullook to Mr Potter on the 20th February, and two or three days after he sent for it, as he had promised. 1 think it was on the 23rd. He bought it without seeing it. To the Court— l have sold other cattle m the same way to plaintiff. Benjamin Young, stated that on the 23rd February he saw Mr Potter at Mr Leslie's place, and Btopped above the bridge, to turn the cattle. Hacket and the two Potters went as far as Tamahere jttidge, and Haoket then said, " here you . / W«J here it the bullook," and then returned.. We drove it as far as Captain Steeie's corner, when the bullook went dowo the wrong roud. I called their attention to it, but they said, " let him go." They said nothing about his being paid or not paid for. Timothy Regan, a laborer, deposed to Beeiug the parties take away the tore** cattle across the bridge, and hearing Haokett cay, "that is my bullock." He did. not hear the Potters object to the beast, but they drove him away. Edwin Beeoham, a settler, knew the bullook. It was a big red and white stag, about 8 owt. It was some time ago that he saw it, and he then told Hackett it was worth £8 or £9. Albert Potter, re-examined— l never Lought anything from Haokett, or any* one, without seeing it myself first. All the beasts bought from anyone are entered m a book. Some time m January defendant had seen him about buying a bullook. . His reply was, "my boh will see it, and if be approves of it, I will buy it." He did not buy it. E Potter stated that his- father told him to go and look at the beast belonging to Haokett. It was a stag. Mr Hackett gaid it was not, and that I knew nothing about it. I refused to take it. He asked me to take it to my father, and he would give him the value of it. I made no definite arrangement to purchase the beast.

The Court decided that the objeotiou to lhe set off was fatal, and gave judgment for £<> 6s, m addition to the £6 6s 4d paid into Court, and costs, £3, to be T?aid at thu rate of £1 per week, payable eaoh Monday.