BOND V. KENNEDY.
TO THE KDITOIt. Sin,—ln your issue of to-day (2i)lb Xovember). Mr Ciresham in making a correction (?) of the statement in ioy report of this case, states that " Mr Hay merely threatened an appeal, and was informed by the Resident Magistrate that he would not be allowed to do so." When I wrote the report I was under the impression, and am still, that tho Magistrate, on Mr Hay asking leave ts appeal, pave him permission to do so, and n«t only I, but others in the Court at the time, were, and are still of the same impression.—l am, &o. Yoi'B Rkpobtkk, TO THE EDITOR. Silt,—Though not technically correct in stating that I "gave notice of appeal," your reporter is practically right, and of course the converse of this applies to thi writer of the letter on this subject in your last issue. There is no such thing in R.M. proceedings as giving notice of appeal but i.n cases where the claim is over £5 and under £20, as was the case in this instance, the course is to apply to tho court for leave to appeal. This I did, and I understood from the Court that leave was granted. During tho adjournment I informed the R.M. that the appeal would not be prosecuted, as the costs were not given against my client. I may stato here that I have never known leave to appeal refused in an R.M. Court but once; and I venture to think that it would bo a sign of great weakness for any R.M. to decline u> pei init his decision to be reviewed by a Superior Court where the machinery for it is provided by law. Regarding the statement in the letter of my threatening to appeal, it is only intended offensively ; ana I leave those who ha<?e attended the Courts to judge whether it is my habit to threaten. Only once have I been present in an R.M. Court when anything approaching to a threat has been used, and that was at Tβ Awamutu. Another solicitor was present also and I was not the one who used the threat. The fact of my giving notice of appeal, or not doing so, could in no way affect the defendant or his solicitor, so long as it was not prosecuted. I rarely put my name into print and would not have done so now except for the attempt made to cavil at a portion of your report which was practically true.—Yours &c. \V. Macghbgor Hat.
Capt. Sonter, of CambiHge, offers Sutton and Son's celebrated seeds. The Hamilton Light Infantry will go through cUibs firing to-day, and inspection parade on Thursday. Air J. Knox will offer on the fitb December, the lease forH yea>-s, of lots 249, 25, and 2(i, Hamilton Domain lands. A rate notice fron the RigUn County Council appears in this issue. Also applications fr.r f ,he duties of dog registrars. In another column will bo found an attractive advertisement from Mr Fowld'e, draper and clothier, Victoria Arcade, Auckland, and it is well to study the fevf {acts theroiu weaented.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT18881201.2.34
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Waikato Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 2558, 1 December 1888, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
520BOND V. KENNEDY. Waikato Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 2558, 1 December 1888, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.