Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, HAMILTON.

Wednesday.— (Before Captain Jackson, R.M.) Lf.Quesne v. A. O. Rum:y.—Claim £S 19s 2d, balance of account. Mr O'Neill for defendant. The defendant disputed a number of charges as excessive, and also claim for interest. Mr Home was examined as to the reasonableness of sundry items, and the Court gave judgment for £5 12s with costs. Several deductions were made and the interest was disallowed.

Pitoi'EiiTV-rAX Commissioner v. Rich and Wim.iams. —Claim £00 4s Sd. Mr O'Neill for plaintiff. Mr Crombie, DeputyCommissioner of Property-tax, appeared and gave evidence. There was no appearance of defendant. Tho Magistrate asked whether it was possible they had mistaken the date or place of hearing, but it seeins they were prepared to defend the action and were well aware of the Court fixture. Mr O'Neill asked for judgment. Mr Crombie, sworn, put in his official authority and deuosed as to the notices of payment of the Property-tax which were advertised in The Waikato Times in ISSL> and 18S8. The assessment of defendants' property was handed in and the returns they had made out on the 3rd July of the tirst year in which they gave the value as over ji!),000, subject to a mortgage by a certain Scottish Investment Company. The Department was then under the belief that this Company was the same as one doing business in Invercargill, of somewhat similar name. A subsequent return made by defendants give the full name of the mortgagees, and the Company was found to be situated in Edinburgh and that it was not represented in New Zealand. The Department, therefore, claimed payment of the tax from the defendants, which they had resisted. The Commissioner had made every enquiry and found the inoi tgagee Company had no agents in the colony. In reply to the Court, Mr Crombie stated that the 10 per cent, tine or interest was added on and became part of the tax itself. Judgment was entered for plaintiff with costs £12 10s 4d, including Mr Crombie's expenses and solicitor's fee £3 3s.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WT18890905.2.13

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Waikato Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 2676, 5 September 1889, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
341

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, HAMILTON. Waikato Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 2676, 5 September 1889, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, HAMILTON. Waikato Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 2676, 5 September 1889, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert