R.M. COURT, TE AWAMUTU.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 3020, 21 November 1891, Page 2

R.M. COURT, TE AWAMUTU.

Wednesday.—(Before Capt. Jackson, H.M.) Hutchinson' v. Baker.—Claim, fil l'Js (id. Mr Cruickaliank who appeared for plaintiff asked for an adjournment pending a settlement. Adjo.irned until lUth December, Ellis v. Stand. —Mr Gresham for plaintiff. Judgement for amount claimed and costs.

Tikatine v. Cosskn,—Mr Gresham who appeared for plaintiff said that the amount had just been paid into Court although the defordant had previously told him he meant to defend it, and he had brought his witnesses, and so he applied for cmts. His Worship said he had no power to grant costs. Mr Gresh mi also nude a similar application in another ease against same defendant with the s uim result.

Hunter v. Nikoua.—Claim, I(s*. Mr Cruickshank for plaintiff. Adjourned until next court day.

Lbwis v. Howard.—Claim, £2 for money lent. Mr Cruickshank for plaintiff, Mr Gresham for defendant. The plaintiff deposed to lending defendant £2 in May, ISOO, to pay his expenses of a trip to Auckland and his promising to pay it back immediately. The defence was that the loan was an advance by plaintiff to the firm of Lewis and C">., in which both plaintiff and defendant, and one Bridgtnan were partners, The defeudant deposed to making a pattern for a waterwheel for the firm, which he was to take to town to get an iron wheel made from it. He was suro plaintiff knew tho object of his visit to town, and advanced him the 62 on the firm's account. He was certain that plaintiff never asked him for the money. In answer to a. searching crossexamination defendant said that the entry in the plaintiff's book charging defendant and not Lewis and Co., with the money must have been made lately. He could not understand how the expenses for this very trip to Auckland were entered in the firm's book being credited to him and he had drawn a cheque for that very amount. Ho had not told Mr Bridgman, who kept the books, of this advance to the firm by Mr Lewis, and he considered it Mr Lewis' duty to send in an account tu tho firm for the money thus lent. This was why Mr Lewis was not credited in the firm's books with the loan. Mr Bridgman also gave evidence for the defence. Mr Cruickshank drew the Court's attention to the firm's books where it was shown that the defendant had received a cheque for the amount of his expenses iu tho trip to tnwu for which he claimed Mr Lewis paid the £2 and also showed how the books of both parties were conclusively in plaintiff's favour. Tho Court was of this opinion also and judgment was given for plaintiff for tho amount claimed, and costs Ids Gd.