RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Waikato Times, Volume XI, Issue 879, 7 February 1878, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Hamilton, Wei aesdiy, Feb. 6. (B fore W. N. Searaticke H.M.) VAGRANCY. niv.rlos Millars was diaryfed with a breicb of ibe 4 >l > section of the V.graut Act 'Van ndment Act 1869. Mr Whitaker ippoare i for informant aud Vli* Hay f-r the defence. D. Birtels, the pros*« -tor, a farmer near Ohaupo, dep .sed th it on the 21st. October, a S md > • morning, partly on Ins own laud and partly on the toad, accus ■•! used threatening =md obscene la i-^ua^e to limseif md his wife.To Mr H iy. — the 'lis une arose ilvmfc cattle. My ows got on to •lefendant's far-n. T.iey ol f en din\^ so, we had previo is q i u-rel-. . I -lid not lay inf inni-i ni previously be--•aus* I thouir'.it [ would require wines-es. ITaunah B irto -s c MT.ibo-ated the tcstimi-ny of her husband. The language is no', Sr. for publication. Mi- lliy c tiled attention to the length ot t.itn». **li»e. I since the •ffenc ,, , nam dv fo n* n > -Mis. Fined £5 m I os"s, £3 2a 6d, or m default 'wo jnouths' imprisontnent, A SISCOND CHARGE. The same »lef nlaiit was charged wi>h using threaenint? and abasive language to one A. rorkest. Mr Whitaker for the prosecutor and Mr Hay for the, defence. iJT> ... A Forkes , sworn, stated he was a firmer esiHn^* ab Uhanpo, on Sun lay, the 29th Ja-mary, defendant used abusive lan^ui^e to him and threatened to break his hea I with a stick saying he would pay ,£lO to do so. Israel Petherill, laborer, d • posed to being present, he bear- 1 abusive langii <ge pass on both side's, but, did not hear defend mt threaten informant m any way. Fined 30s, and M% 5s costs, or one months' imprisonmen. ABS-XLVDIXG \FPRE\TICE. Francis Irwin, charged with leaving the service of hi-* master, he being an apprentice from the Naval Training School, was ordered to be returned to his m ister. D. ller'erson v. VV". J. Gray. — Claim, £15 17s. A set-off w s put m agaiusr thin claim. This was a disputed mcc .nut for overtime, the dei'eu:laut working as a carpenter for plaintiff at Ngaruawahia and H mil ton. Judgment was given £15 17s an-.l costs, £2 10-s, less the sum claimed on the se^ffof £7 10s. THE DOG TAX. Chairman Waikato Cpumfcv-

oiU"cil i. D. Gardner. — O'am .fill 9< 61. Mr Hiv for plainti ff* ti Whit-.ker for tho defence. Janes McPheraon, swor.i, state*? he w*B secretary and treasurer t Ihe Wukato County Council. Th present cane was brought by the instrnctinns of th** County Council. I have endeavoured to procure a Gazette, No. 2, of 1872, bnt have failed. Mr Whitaker, on behalf of the East Hi rail ton Town Board, admitted that by a Gazette of the Provincial Government published m 1872, East Hamilton was oroolaimed uuder the Dog Nn sance Act. A Gazette of the 12th July, 1877, excepting East Hamilton and Cam'ridge North Township Highway Board from the Dog Act was put m, Albert Potter, sworn, said I am Chairman of the Hamilton East Town Board. A dog tax for 1876 7 was levied by that. Board, and the amounts collected were received by them Th>) Dog Naisance Aot was also also put into Court. The Court, after some some con aider* t ion, adjudged that the Gazette of 1872 (idmiited by defendant's Cfjftnael), onniriugr the -Act. into ford*;, was still *n force and is m no way affected by tr.e provisions of the G..ze; c of July 12, 1877 Judgment ior plaintiffs for £11 9s 6.1 nnd costs, £2. Person v. Puteer.— Claim £6 19s 6d Albert Potter sworn, stated that pi i i tiff did some work for liim us stated m tho bill of pan culars but the building ol the house was partially <tone only. Plaintiff dep *aed that th • other j work done was completed nnd charged for at a reasonable price The house wa«. built according to agreement and £5 over the contract £27 was charged for extras. Defendant m.de no objection to the accoun when presented, but made 4 pa\ nients on account, of £11 alto* gether. He never dispute the account till after those payments. Plaintiff recalled stated that the spe-itication-. for build. ng the house were put down m writing. He made me an onVr m writing tn d<> it for £27, I told him 1 would not give beyond £17 or £18. He brought no tun her • ffer. He asked me f /0 let him go on wth it and 1 did so. Tbn bui di gis not completed. ] told him not to exceed £3 m the re-aira of lhe diviy. j Benj mm Young, carpenter stated tho pi-io* or a new pair ot shafts Would be £1 10*. r wimid do the whole ol the w. *rk m the- house as explained to me for £20. It is not finished. I examined the house this moiling-. Koiiert Hill, carpenter, deposed that he had seen the house and valued the labour at 15s the pquare, abo'r i2<» m alj. What is done he would do himst-lf for that that sum. Judgment for defendant, with costs, £3 Is 6'd.