RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, HAMILTON. Wednesday.— (Before Mr H. W. North croft, R.M.)

Waikato Times, Volume XXII, Issue 1850, 15 May 1884, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, HAMILTON. Wednesday.— (Before Mr H. W. North croft, R.M.)

CRIMINAL CVSKS. Piiuui Tomonli was charged with being drunk* while m chaige of a hoioe in Hamilt, non the 3ul inst. He wasa s also charged with ndmg- over the traffic bridge at other than a, walking pace, Accused pleaded q ulty, and w.i^ fined 20s for the first olteneo, and .">s for the second, with costs. A. Clements was charged with driving over the traffic budge at other than a walking pace. Defendant did not appear, but wiote, admitting the charge, and pleading that he had quite fm gotten the by-law. He was willing to pay any nne and expenses. Fined ."5s and cost--. A young lad named Lawnon MeSweeney was charged on a summons with stealing pear:, fiom Mr S. Tea-,' 01 chard at Hamilton East. Defendant pleaded guilty. Piosecutoi- said he had no wish to pre^s the charge, and would not have htuninoned the lad had he not been uutruthful and impudent. His Worship, in dismissing the case, hoped the occtmonce would be a warning to the boy, and teach him not to take other people's fiuit in future. \V. M. Hay wa» charged on the information of Jame-. MePhersmi, cletk to the Kmkimoa ltoad Bivud, with neglecting to mm )ve fui/o from the road adjoining his land, Lota . "57 and 57a, Kiukiiiioa. Plaintiff deposed tliat the defendant had received notice to lemove the fur/.e four months ago, aid the penalties which ought to ho inflicted m sucli afligiant case would now amount to £300. Andiew Piimiose, chaiiman of the road board, gave evidence as to the condition of tho road where the fur/.e was growing. He said if these cases were to be decided by legal quibbles, he for one would not move m the matter again. He thought these cases should bo decided in equity. i His Worship reminded Mr Punirose that the boaid was proceeding by statute, ciiminally, and not by equity. The pioceedingo weie taken under the provisions of &e\eial acts of the Legislature. Yov the defence Mr Hay submitted that the plaintiff had failed to prove the service of the notice to remove the furze. He had many other objections, but as the plaintiffs had stated that they were going for defendant in order to got some cheap law he did not intend to gratify them by disclosing his other objections. His Worship held the objection to be fatal, and dismissed the information with Osth. Richard George was charged with being unlawfully on the premises of Mr H. H. Metcalfe at Hamilton on the 30th ult. Defendant, who pleaded that he was under the influence of liquor, said he had called at the house to ask the way, and did not intend to break the law. The bench administered a severe caution to defendant and let him off on his> agreeing to pay all expenses. Tho same defendant was also charged with riding over the traffic bridge at other than a walking pace, and fined 20a and costs.

civir. casks. G. P. Day v. Purdie. Claim £7 13s, judgment summon:*. Mr Hay for plaintiff. Oidered to pay £2 per month with costs, £3 10-,. W. Andrews \. Hugh Kelly. Claim £7 12a for labour and hor->e hue, and money leceived from the Kirikiriroa Road Board. on plaintiff's account, and converted by defendant to his own Uhe. Mr O'Neill for the plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed with £1 15s 4d co«,ts. A. Bach a. Hugh Kelly. Claim £2 10s for bicach of warranty. Mr O'Neill for plaintiff, and Mi Hay for defendant. The paiticulars of this ca.se are already well known. Plaintiff deposed that he bought a cow from Kelly in Maich last for £(j, on the understanding that she would calve in a. month. The cow did not calve — was not in calf, and was conbequently of no use to plaintiff. He had been offered £3 10s for her as beef, and he claimed the difference between that sum and £6". Evidence was led to bhow that defendant knew at the time of the hale that the cow was not in calf, he having heard the former owner of the bea^t, Mr G. Barker, give that as his reason for belling her. Barker sold her to one Chas. Hall for 355, and Hall sold her to Kelly for £2 5s. — Mr Hay said Kelly desired to call Barker, and if this witness admitted having informed Kellj that the cow was not in calf, he (Mr Hay) would throw up the case. Kelly had instructed him that he had sold the cow belteving her to be in calf, and if that were so he onghfc to gain the case. Mr Barker was then put in the box, and deposed that he had told Hall, in the prebence of Kelly, that his reason for selling the animal was that she was not in calf. Mr Hay thereupon threw up the case, and his Worohip gave judgment for £2 10s, and £1 ISs Gd costs. Andiews v. \V. H. Kelly. — Claim £1!) 15s 5d for wages. Mr O'Neill for plaintiff, and Mr Hay for defendant. Judgment reserved. W. H. Kelly v. Andrew.— Claim, £19 7s, for goods, &c. Mr Hay for plaintiff and Mr O'Neill for defendant. Judgment reserved. James McPheison, inspector of slaughterhouses, Waikato county, vH. Tristram. — Claim. £1 2s, slaughtering' fees. Mr O'Neill, for the defendant, raised the objection that the action should have been, brought as a summary proceeding before justices, as provided by the Slaughtejs houses Act. His Worship held the objection to be fatal, and dismissed the summons, with costs.

Mr Firsroy Peacocke, advertises good turnip feed for sheep near Hamilton. Miss Doran giyes her customers a'gentlc remainder in our advertising columns. A lady offers to give instructions in English French, German, and Music. Ratepayers of the Rangiriri, Kirikirircu and Tamahere Road districts, are notified that the annual rate is about to be struck in their respective districts. Mr A. Sharp, wishes all outstanding account* to be paid at once to Mr W. H. Sharp. Tenders are invited by the Chairman of thf Cambridge Road, diaiuago works v