MAGISTERIAL.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 3335, 29 September 1911, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

CIVIL CASES

A lengthy cause list was presented at the sitting' of the Magistrate’s Court yesterday. Mr. W. A. Barton, S.M., and in all forty-two cases were called, judgment being given for the plaintiffs in the following undefended civil cases:—Olaf Anderson (Mr. Blair) v. Stanley Dawson, 7s (balance of claim) and costs os; Lily and Y iolet Attwood (Mr. Burnard) v. George Alph, amount of claim £5, and costs £1 2s 6d; John Rutherford Shaw (Mr Bright) v. Richard Leach, £l7 2s 6d, and costs £2 11s 6d; Emily Wallis (Mr. Burnard) v. John Lowrie, £2 16s 6d, and costs £2; James Clive Collins (Mr. Burnard) v. same,'£4 4s, and costs £2; Walter Howard (Mr. Bumaifl) v. William Smith, £ls 4s Bd, and costs £2 3s 6d; Frederick Eure (Mr. Jt>urnard) v. Wm. Pilcher, for costs 16s; J. E. Newton (Mr. T. Alston Coleman) v. John Harlick, £2 10s 3d, and costs 10s; Thomas Howarth (Mr. Burnard) v. James Lamont (sen.), £1 12s 9d, and costs ss; same v. Albert Higham (by consent), £1 12s 9d, and costs ss; same v. David McKay, £ll 10s, and costs £1 10s 6d; S. J. Daulton (Mr. F. W. Nolan) v. Waaka, order for payment of £5 6s 9d forthwith, in default five days’ imprisonment: Roy Garfield Crawford (Mr. Burnard) v. 'Ernest 'Wilkinson, order for immediate payment of £2 4s, in default two days’ imprisonment; Major Hooper Clark' (Mr. Burnard) v. Wm. Turnbull, order for immediate payment of £7 15s 6d, in default eight days’ imprisonment: Walter Howard (Mr. Burnard) v. Hugh Binnie, order for payment of £3 4s 6d forthwith, in default three days’ imprisonment. The case of Fong Wing v. Lou Chee, a claim for £5, was again called, but the plaintiff failed to put in an appearance. Mr. Burnard, who appeared for the defendant, said that he had written to plaintiff’s solicitor, but had not had a reply. He asked that judgment be given for the defendant. Judgment for the defendant, with costs amounting to £3 12s 6d, was given. Under judgment summons James East (Mr. Burnard) proceeded against Albert Higham for £6 10s, a debt for groceries. The debtor, giving evidence on his own behalf, said he was a married man with three children, and was paying 11s 6d a week for rent. Up to about three months ago he had been earning £2 5s a week and since then £2 12s a week. His wife and children had been ill at various times for a period extending over two years. To Mr- Burnard, he stated that he had paid Mr. East up to the time that sickness overtook him. His wife was still ill, and he was paying a woman and a girl to- assist his wife. His Worship said it was quite obvious that he could not make an order, as by doing so it would deprive the debtor of his liberty to render his wife the assistance lie was now providing.