RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURT, TE AWAMUTU.

Waikato Times, Volume XXII, Issue 1861, 10 June 1884, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRA TES' COURT, TE AWAMUTU.

Thursday.—(Before Mr H. W. Northcroft, R.M., and Messrs Bockett, Tole, W. S. Rutherford, and IT. Goodfellow, J.f.)

HU.N'AITKMOA Y. R. J. GILLIKS.—Mr W. M. Hay for plaintiff, and Mr Gresham for defendant. Mr Hay opened the case by stating that this action was brought by Hunaitemoa, the owner of a horse which was sold by the Sheriff at Cambridge, and which had never been parted with with his consent by the owner, Htuiaifcejnoa. The learned counsel quoted several authorities to show that the owner had good ground for an action. The horse in question was bought by a man named Dogherty at the Sheriffs sale, and was seized under distress warrant from Dogherty, and sold by public auction iv Te Awamutu, and was alleged to have been bought by the defendant. The plaintiff claimed £12 for the value of the mare, £5 damages, and £10 Os Gil special damages. Hunaitemoa was called. Mr Gresham asked if the witness knew the nature of an oath, to which he replied that he was a stranger hsrc, and was comparatively a child, but he knew on taking an oath it was imperative to spenk the truth. Mr Greshatn asked what the witness's age was, to which he replied 17 years. Counsel then took exception to his bringing an action as he was under age, and should appear by next friend. Some discussion then ensued. Counsel for plaintiff quoted authorities to show that plaintiff could sue, but the court said the objection was fatal. Counsel then asked the court to appoint someone to act as plaintiffs next friend. The bench asked witness, by what means he arrived at the knowledge of his age. Witness said his father told him that was his age. The Bench ordered the Court to be cleared to consider the objection. On the Court being re-opened, the Bench were of "opinion that the objection was fatal, as there was no plaintiff. Counsel then argued at some length, Mr Hay quoting section 80 of the Resident Magistrates' Act to show that the Resident Magistrate could amend any errors in any civil pit3eedings before him. Tlie Bench this time retired to consider, with the result that an adjournment to amend was granted to' Mr Hay, provided Mr Hay guaranteed the costs of the day in the eveqfc of the case going against the plaintiff, to which Mr Hay agreed, and then made a formal application for an adjournment to, amend,, and gave the name of Rarigiorua as' plaintifl's next friend. Mr Gresham argued that the costs of the day, amounting to £4 Is, should be? paid in any case, ana that the plaintiffs friend should be of sufficient means to.guarantee costs. The Bench decided the costs should not abidfe events The & case? was adjourned till the 3rd of July, on* which day the R.M. .Court will sit here. —[Owa oorresp6»vlen^J,%^ VTvK -.£>