R.M. COURT, HAMILTON.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 2540, 20 October 1888, Page 2

R.M. COURT, HAMILTON.

TllUHSDAY—(Before Capt. Jackson, R.M.) DEUT CASKS. Edgecombe v. Ar.i.KN".—ln this case, which was adjourned from last Court day, judg ment was Riven, non-suiting the plaintiff. Several other unimportant debt cases were disposed of. W. M. Hay v. A. Patknk.-Claim, £43 13s (id ; for promissory note £31 10s, and interest thereon £12 3s (id. Defendant admitted the amount due on tho promissory note, but disputed the interest, as he stated that the plaintiff had agreed neither to press him for the money nor to charge any interest. Plaintiff stated that the only arrangement was that lie would not present the note for either six weeks or two months, nothing whatever being mentioned about foregoing the interest. Judgment was given for plaintiff for amount claimed. McPiikiwos v. Hay, for breach of Waikato County by-laws by driving over the Narrows Bridge at other than a walking pace on the 20th August last past.— The defendant asked that tho case bo adjourned until next C'..urt day as he had not had time to summon a witness from Auckland. His Worship decided to hear the evidence for the prosecution so as to s:ive expense by bringing the witnesses in again next day.—Thomas Pennell, labourer, Tair.ahere, deposed that he was employed by the Waikato County Council as caret iker ( f tho Narrows Bridge. He was on the :20th August within 300 yards of the Narrows Bridge, and between S and !) o'clock in the morning he saw Mr Hay drive over the biidge with a buggy and pair at a fast trot. Coming down th" hill at the Waikato end of the bridge, Air Hay whipped the bay horse on the near side I nt did not see him urge the horses on tho bridge. In the evening, Mr Hay recrossed the bridge again trotting, but not so fast as in the morning. Cross-examined by Mr Hay : Saw defendant strike the bay horse twice going down hill. There was a copy of the by-law at either end of the bridge on the 20th. Could see the whole of the bridge, as he left off working and went up on to the embankment. There is a steep hill going down on to the bridge, but the horses could be prevented trotting down on to the bridge. Could not swear to having seen anybody else trot over, but had heard others trotting over. Never saw Mr Way trot over the bridge. Had trotted over the bridge himself once on urgent business.— (:!eo. Way, deposed that he saw defendant drive over tho Narrows Bridge on a Monday, but could not swear to tho dale He was on horseback about a chain away. Cross-examined by Mr Hay: There was some one with defendant, but believed defendant was driving, as tho other person had not hold of the reins. Was trotting, hut not driving furiously. Had seen others trot over the bridge, and had seen a buggy like Mr Hay's driven across since at other than a walking pace. It was possible to pull up a buggy so as to walk over the bridge, but with a four horse waggon and a heavy load it would be almost impossible, unless thorp, was a shoe wn the waggon. Had trotted over the bridge himself one day last winter when heading cattle.—The ease was at this stage adjourned to the 7th November.