RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Inangahua Times, Volume II, 14 January 1881, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thubsdjiy, 13th January, 1881. (Before W. H. BeveH, Esq., 8.M.) [ Seabloht Y. Biace. Tbis was an* assault case arising from a neighbours' quarrel, and admitted by defendant, Who in extenuation said that the informant had ill-used his children. A. Searighfeatated that defendant had struck him in the face twico in the presence of a .man named Bates. Defendant iyged that he had been pro* 'voiced by th§ informant jumping over the dividing fence, and abusing one of defendant's children. His Worship admonished the accused not to take the law into bis own bands, 'and fined bim £1, and costs, Sahpson v. Connington and Moobe. £_Thia wa»„.an information laid-ffig^u&t. pPP^jpegraph ffiio, and interrupingthe operation of tbSnin^ by falling a tree across it. ; '„ \ 0. W.^mjfe, officer' in*charge of telegraph Btat)oj||t Beef on, stated :On 22nd De^nihe^P wirelfras interrupted, and I'stli^l^! lineman to see what was' tii» / ,m^& Oa returning, he reported -'muSk defendants had fallen a tree, near BrS|Ffl farm, across the line, which had ..ftlgraii four ordinary poles, and an angle|ff§|& of the line, and four insulators, reported to headquarters, and was direCTedfto lay the information. The cost of destroyed material was— one angle pole, 30s j four ordinary poles, 20s. each, and four-' insulators, ls 6d each ; total, £5 16s. The cost of repairs amounted, to £6. 15 a. W^naiid Boejfs : I am a lineman stationed fl^B##|n. I went to Fern Flat on the 220 d « December, and on the road wes informed tbat the defendants had brokea'ithe 8J&. I met them on the road, and thef^f3enied all knowledge of breaking the lifie. On coming to the spot, 1 found that five poles, and some of the insulators were broken, wbich I attributed to have„been caused by a tree having fallen across the line. The tele- ! gratih consti uCson party being in tho j vicinity, I obtsSffed their assistance to j repair the line}" The following day I again met the defendants, and told them to see Mr Sampson. Moore admitted the failing of tla.trflp, but stated it was accidentally dJe., On examination, I fo;md rr ihat,the#ee J had been cut in suoh a manner^ would'make it fall across the line. I \ found p eces about 20 feet beyond the line? I told Conn ing ton that the .fJJsjjffl^[Jf ,c damage would cost abSw**Tl%und that the tree had been cleared im tbe line by the time I reached it, and it appeared as if it had done to concealV.lhe evidence of the tree having fallen I across. The tree bad fallen about tigy centre of the stretchabout two chains from either po'e. Th« wires were not Iparted, but were twisted up and lying infthe creek. G. W. Samp^On, recalled, stated that Moore admitted the failing of the tree, and offered £3 for repairing the damage. He also stated |hat the tree in falling hsd sarried away another tree, wbicb hit the srire, anpi that he would wish to have the Base settle!' out. of Court. His Worshij? fined them £5, and awarded £5. daiAages, nnd csis. Munp|t v. Cochrane. This was an Mtion to recover the value )f a horse, Uif"ia charge of defeudant ■or bait. I Mr Jones appeared for the plaintiff, md Mr Lynch jor defendant. Mr Jones ; i/iving opened the fjess, •ailed tho foUovibg evidence :— William Mn-pliy: On the 35'h Sep» ember iesi, i. arrived at Cochrane';}

Hotel from Antonio's Flat. I put the hon* in the stahle, and shortly after* wards saw defendant, and told bim to feed it carefully. Had tea in the hotel that, night, and nest morning at half*past sis, vent to the stable, aod found the hor?e gop^ Tbe saddle and bridle wag ? there. Spoke to Cochrane about tbe , horse, and he said that the horse must have got out during the night. Never r interfered with tbe animal after putting it ' in the stable. Paid defend snt for the livery, and my own tea. Advertised for the horse, and searched for it. Value the : borse at £20. Lost about sis days looks ing for the horse. Defendant keeps an 1 hotel, and the stables are in his yard. Cross-examined by Mr Lynch : There were over^ forty of us in from the Black- ! wafer on the day in question. I know i M'Lennan, Did not bear bim agree to - take charge of the horses. Don't tyifow ' where Coabraoe was when I put tlie hoß^4fKbs^*bls» % eCT*tntrinff* there. A feW minutes after patting the , borse in the stable, saw defendant in the bar, and told him to look carefully after tfterhorse* lama oTnef , anclliave nad no experience in horses. The animal belongs to Samuel M'Naught^ Tbis closed the case for thejpiaintiff. Mr Lynoh opened the detence, and called the following evidence :—» William Cochrane 1 1 am an hotelkeeper residing in Reefton, and recollect the day in question. Remember Mnrpby snd others arriving on that date. Tbere was a funeral from Blackwater on that day, and I went, and when I got back tho stable was full of horses, and M'Lennan was feeding them. Don't think I saw defendant till about 8 o'clock tbat night. Did not see him when I returned from the funeral. Some time during tbe night had a conversation with defendant abont the horses. I era not M iivery stable* keeper,* but feed horses occasionally belonging to lodgers. Do not let horses on hire. Never saw the horse, and was never there at* alt. Did not get any information of the borse being lost for a month, Afterwards I have made every effort to find the mare, and have expanded sir or seven pounds ia the search. Examined by Mr Jones : I deny hay» ing admitted to North tbat Ji he borse bad been fed, and that it would be all right. I did not see anything wrong in M'Lennan feeding the horses in my stable. Joseph. M'Lennan, fasmes,. at Black* water, I recollect I4lh September, when we came to Reefton on the occasion of a funeral. I know complainant end also defendant. When JJtook the Jhorses into , -Ooohr^ne'a y^4 hCpMtepros<*l|^-rird«r* ■ itr^lHtlblif Tof'iaB Ibe houses. I did not see Murphy giving the horse to Cochrane. Tfee horse was first pot in the large stable, but after shifted into a loose box. I told Murphy that tho pony was preventing his horse from feeding. The loosechox was closed. Tbo pony was taken away from tbe box about 11 o'clock by M'Cormick. The missing mare bad a faol, but not at foot at tbe time. Cochrane authorised me to feed the horses: Any stranger could during tho nigbt go in and take out a horse. There were seyen or eight horses in the stables. I paid for the feed of my own horse in a bartering way. Samuel M'Aleer. striker for a blacksmith, residing at Reefton. Remember the day of the funeral. I saw M'Lennan on that day. He asked me to water his horse, and I watered all the horses. I was iU during tbe night, and on going out I saw a wbite horse coming out of the loose»box, and I also saw a man there. The box wes closed in. Ido not know when the otlter horse was taken out from the loose-box. William Cochrane, junr., contractor, residing in Reefton. Remember Mth September, and remember Murphy about the stables. In the evening, I saw two horses in the bos. I assisted in saddling and getting out the pony. The white horse remained. During the night the previous witness called me, as he said someone was taking out the horse in ques* tion. I got up and thought that someone had taken it to go home. The value of the borse would be about £10. Thomas Cochrane, son of the defendant, recollect the day of tbe funeral. Do not know the circumstances attending the loss of the nia re. M'Naught, the owner, asked me to look for her, which I did for sevecal days, without success. Her market value would be about £10 or £11 pounds. James M'Nau^bt : I am the o^ner of the mere in question. Sho was reared on tbe farm, and frequently returned home by herself. She had a foal twelve months old, and I ha>e refused £20 for her. Mr Lynch for defendant, submitted that no negligence had been shown, and that tbe defendant is not a livery stable* keeper, but lhat h&aUjwed his customers to stable their horses at his place as an inn-keeper. Mr Jones, for the plaintiff, said that Mr Cochrane had not n«cd reasonable precaution to secure the safety of the horse, which at tbe time was in his custody. Judgment for £25, and costs of Court, 255. National Bank v. Heslop. Mr Lynch for the Dank, Mr Jones for defendant. Olaim for tho 91nount.pt £'25 on a Bill of i.xchange drawn l>y Strain fori and Coup, of which defcnJ«ut is the acceptor.

— — — — i TV. B. llobertson, manager of the Nai tional Bank at Reefton, produced the bill, i which at maturity, was dishonoured. A small dividend in the , estate of Stratferd and Coupe amounting to £3 Bs. only has been paid against the total amount of the Bill by the endorsers and drswers, Ha?e demanded payment from defendant but received none. Cross-examined by Mr Jones : became possessed of the bill from the Bank of New Zealand in the ordinary way of busi* ness. The record on the books shows that value has been received for the bill, which was discounted by the National Bank, and placed to the credit of Stratford and Coupe. I do not know who made tbe entry in the book produced, but I know that tbe amount contained ia the bill has been placed ta the credit of the drawers at the Greymoutb branch, The bfll was sent up to Befftoit, jfc ' &c pur--pose of collection. *-*" " £~ Q^Hestop,, fe?it# stabfe^eeper i&sf. * ding in Beefton, iOmitted the - signature to the bill as being his, but the body of tbe billW not filled in whefr ho signed. My signature was obtained in considers* ■; tion tbat in the event of Stratford not oV liming a dray and harness tame at Beefton, the bill was to be cancelled. I did not receive the dray and harness or any- ; thing in consideration for tbe bill, and thought it was actually cancelled in terms j of Stratford's and my . agreement until a long time afterwards, when I was sued upou it. After arguments of Counsel on hoth aides had been concluded. His Worship in giving judgement stated that owing to the delay iv serving subpoenas for the defendant, winch necessarily had taken place, the case had been adjourned from time to lime, as his worship could not finally deal with the matter until the documents had been returned to this Court, and which only now are placed before him for the first time, enabling him to deal with care according to tbe provi* sions of: the B.M. Act ; nevertheless the counsel of the bank being well aware of the reason for the delay, the bank had in tbeir wisdom, thought fit to report the matter to the Minister of Justice, and to accuse the bench of negligence, tfnd aU though it had iv the case been an easy thing to explain the delay to those concerned with the business of hw and jus* tiee, yet he thought that the Bank might have been advised to delay their charee until the ease had been finally dealt wi- h # Judgement for plaintiff for £21 18s 7u, with costs of court and 2 guineas profes* sional costs. Shields Bbos. v. 'David. Claim fur £11 6s 7d for goods sold and delivered. * : _ Mr jlpnes appeared fbr plaintiff, and •Jfe Lynch for defendant, * ■"■'' This was an action for the recovery of this amount having been contracted by the wife ot the defendant without his authority, and against his oxpress orders. It appeared that the wife of defendant kept a cow on her own account, and was in tbe habit of ordering somej feed and paying for it—the defendant deuying all liability in the matter, and bad distinctly told plaintiff not fo give defendant's wife anything on credit, as he would not pa; for it, unless it was for necessaries to the house. After eyidence had been taken, acd the counsel quoted authorities in support and against the case, the Court held that the cow being actually the property ol defendant, as his wife without a deed could not hold any property, and more* over, as the defendant bubsequeally had sold the said cow to liquidate another liability incurred for its maintenance. Tbe judgment would «o for plaintiff, for the amount claimed, with costs. Notice of appeal was given. The Court then adjourned.