Court Day.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume V, Issue 653, 29 August 1891, Page 2

Court Day.

Messrs Matthewson and Lewis, the Justices who presided on the Bench on Thursday, had a long day of it. the business occupying the Court until nearly 5 o’clock. EJA. man named Robert Brigg was charged with being unlawfully on premises. The Sergeant said the man had been sleeping out .some nights, and as he was found about the post office premises it was necessary to arrest lim, it being dangerous to allow that sort of thing. The man pleaded guilty, but said he had work to go to and would be off at ones if the Bench gave him a chance. He was then discharged,* on giving a promise that he would go to his work without delay. The civil case of Ward and Woodman v. Clayton and Sawyer took up all the morning. Mr Chrisp appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr DeLautonr for defendants. The dispute had arisen over some maize bought, the claim being £7 7s 91. This debt was acknowledged, less 63 charged for sacks, and then Messrs Clayton and Sawyer put in a set-off of £8 Is, being charges on barley sent for sale on commission, but which had subsequently been taken ont of the hands of the firm. Judgment was given for defendants, with costs £l4l. Notus of appeal was given. In the case Mrs Bidgood v. Matthew Hall, £9, value of horses which Mr Bidgood had given defendant to sell. Mr Finn appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Jones for defendant. Mr Bidgood, who had become bankrupt, deposed that he had acted as agent tor his wife in the matter, but Mr Jones raised three noinsuit points, contending that this agency had not been made known to Mr Hall, and also that the evidence in no way connected the horses mentioned with those defendant had agreed to sell. The Bench nonsuited the plaintiff on the latter point; costs, 10s. J, 8. Hiddons sued A. H, Barron for £lO, or the return of a horse. Mr Day appeared for plaintiff, and the defendant mainly conducted hie own case. It appeared that Mr Siddons had a filly which he arranged that Mr Barron, a trainer, should try for raoiog purposes, or it he to'.d her for a 'certain price he was to get half. If the filly was any good for racing they were to run her on shares. The evidence was contradictory as to the nature of this arrangement. Plaintiff sold the filly to Mr Hepburn, but Mr Birron refused to give up delivery un'est he was given half what the animal had brought. There was the qne man's evidence against the other's, and the defendant was not allowed an adjournment at that stage to gat witnesses he said he could bring. Defendant was ordered to give un delivery of the filly, and told that any olalm he thought he had for feeding it could form ground for a separate action. The costa were £2 Is. Miss Isabella Pritchard sued E. P. Joyce for £2O. Mr Day for plaintiff, and Mr Jones tor defendant. Miss Pritchard, it appears, is 1 a domestic servant who had been engaged in Mr Joyce's service. Ou leaving she had not ' taken her box, saving that she was going up country. Mr Phipps had gone over to get the box, but Mrs Joyce refused to give it up without Miss Pritchard came for it herself, Mr Phipps said his instructions were from Mrs East, who keeps a registry office, bat Miss Pritchard knew that he was going for the box. The plaintiff said she feared that if she went herself there would be unpleasant, ness, but in cross-examination she said tb-ie was no quarrel when she had left. She had not thought it necessary to give the carter an 1 order, nor had spoken to Mr Joyce about the box. The case produced come warm passages 1 between counsel, to which Mr Joyce added his opinion on the matter. Mr Day said it would I be more creditable to Mr Joyce if the case had 1 not been allowed to come to Court. Mr Jones 1 later on retorted warmly, saying the case was 1 simply brought into Court to put costs on 1 the defendant. Mr Day strongly resented 1 this assertion. He asked the Bench to 1 prevent such remarks being made. Mr Jones 1 said that Mr Day had opened hie case by 1 insinuating that Mr Joyce had aotod in a 1 discreditable way, and thus left himself open to comment from the other side. He (Mr I Day) knew that if Mr Joyce had been properly 1 approached on the matter there would have 1 boon no trouble, but the sending of threatening lettera would land the case in Court, 1 Mr Joyce, in his evidence, deposed I that there was no objection whatever to ' giving the girl her box, so long as sha i gave authority to someone to get it, I or went personally. A few warm pas--1 sages ensued between defendant and Mr Day, Mr Joyce characterising the csss as a miserable, paltry one that ought never to 1 have been brought into Court. He had tolfl Mrs Joyce to see that proper authority wqs ' given, or that the girl went herself,. before 1 the box wae taken. The girl told him she was going up country, and he had understood had gone a long distance away, instead of which she was now in service at Mr Day's. Mr Day said that made no difference in the case—Mr Joyce had no . right to keep the boxes. Mr Joyce said ■ the box was there at any time for the girl 1 to get. In regard to the message delivered by the clerk Mr Joyce said he had spoken emphatically to some young men. Mr > Jones said that Mr Joyce had acted oare--1 fully in this case, because he bad been " bad " once before, having let a paWqn tak4 delivery of a box for which he was afterwads held responsible. It would have been a very easy thing for a note to have been written for Mr Phipps, and signed by Miss Pritchard. Mr Day, In addressing the Bench, zaid that l they all knew Mr Joyce to be good-hearted, but he was a bit obstinate at times. Mr Joyed objected to Mr Day making comment an his (Mr Joyce's) character. In reply to the Bench Mr Jones said tbs box could be got at any time—there was no lien of any kind on it. The Bench thought the time of the Court ought not to have been occupied by the case —it would be an eary thing for Mies Pritchard to sigh a sorap'of paper authorising the carter 1 to get delivery of tbe box, Mr Day tbongbf that Mr Joyoo should send tbe box. Mr Jones said that wquld ha rjflloqlqqa, and Mr Joyce (who was in the witness box) saifi Mr Day would l|v» til] ho was gray before hs > (defendant) would do that. Tbe case WM dismissed without costs, Mr Joyce saying that Mr Phipps could go and get ths box then if be liked, on an order from Mr Jones, The business was terminated by a ease brought by J. Burns ' against W. Adair, o'aim £1 16’. Judgment was given for defendant, wiihout costa. Mr Day was fof the plaintiff, and Mr Chrisp for defendant,