RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Inangahua Times, Volume IX, Issue 1454, 8 October 1884, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

, — * (Before W. H. Kevecx, E*q , R.M.) Tuesday, October 7th, 1834. Incorrigible Cun.n. Mary Ann Bees : lam the wife of James Recs, but am living apart from my husband and receiving from him 30/- per week ; I have five children ; the boy in Court is my son, his naina

in John Jackson, and lie will be 13 yoars of age in December ; 1 have no control over the boy and can do nothing with him ; he runs away from home and often stops away all night ; ho has beou away from mt* for the hist ; fight or nine days; he watches me • away and then takes food out of the safe; I wish the boy sent to the Ln dnstrial School ; I should be -pre parcel to pay for the boy's maintenance if I received my maintenance regularly ; the boy belongs to the Church of England denomination. His Worship said he would m»k«' an order for the admission of the hoy into the Industrial School at Burnluun.. until he attains the age of 16 years, 0/weekly to bo paid for maintenance. WILFUL DESTRUCTION OF PROPERTY. Mary Ross was charged on ilie iiformation of Gaven Graham wiili smashing windows and doing o'Jiadamage to informant's property y-a Murray Crock, to the value- of £3. Mr "Lynch appeared for plantift, and Mr Jones for defendant. Barbara Graham : I am the wife o? complainant, and reside at Murray Creek; on Monday last Mrs Ross o-me over and called nic a lot of names ; I closed the door, and she then ton'sup an axe and broke the dog keniK- 1 . she then went round to th back n-ud burst the door in; she let the dog loose and I was calling it in ; she us'-d abusive language. Mr Jones objected to any evicMifie being taken as to the language u?''d. His client was not charged with using abusive language. Mr Lynch said the nature of the language used would be evidence ol!Ui<! nature of the assault. Mr Jones said the intent was imrnr,.tei'ial. His Worship allowed the question to he put. Examination continued : She sau' she would strike me Hown ; sic ihv?\ a shovel through the window atr' smashed about 8/- worth of erocker) ware. By Mr Joaes. Defendant has b:' j n a neighbor of mine for aoou; -i-v. mouths; there was nobody else a ! >o'i; there ; had been on visiting tenos >. ith her, and she was frequently at u\? house; don't know how the disu.v.vt ance aroso ; did not say anything io her to provoke her; the dog house ..;)•> broken up first; was not hiving i\ « i y row with her at the time ; ha.l no words with her to oau?3 he;- co 'n.-wJc it up ; she split the door ; I did not open the front door and throw r:ii\ crockery out; am sure [did not i -.'.-■■ up an axe after she left e.\u\ l;->.vi' ;•. smashing match; swear 1 ii;d .01 strike the door with an axe ; I Wi»* married last Saturday ; did uoi teli Mrs Ross that I would have to get ?. i police court case to compel Graliarii \o marry mo. Gavin Graham : I am a miner ; r was not present when the assur.lt tool-, place; I was 1 aA work when a iTiPSL-ago came for me anffon going home I round one door smashed another split, and the. dog kennel broken ; it woul-i tukc£3 to make new doors. By Mr Jones : The doors are ahovit 6ft. x 3ft; 50ft. would muke the two doors, the lock 6/- and 7/6 for the window, and there was the crockm y. A witness was called but he knew nothing of the case, and this close A plan tiff's case. % Mr Jones having opened the case called Jane Ross : Mrs G rail am set h?r dog on to my dogs and cows; sbr* complained about my goats eating up the gi'ass ; I told her not to come setting her dog on my goats ; I weut 10 her place for some crockery I had lent her ; she slammed the door in my face and threw the crockery through the window at me; previous to this? she told me she would have to get i;p something of the kind in order to g<;t Graham to marry her as his life was insured ; I did not take up the axe ; I did not smash the dog house or tho doors nor windows. By Air Lynch : I lent Mrs Gmham j two saucers, two plates and a mug ; I ! lent them about two months ago; &he came for them ; it was about 1 o'clock when I went to her house for the crockery. This closed the case. His Worship discredited the cvi domce for the defence, and inflicted a tine of £\ and 13/- costs of court, and 30/- as reparation of the damage done to the property. Fiery Cross Extended Company v. Just-in-time Company. Mr Jones for plantiff said that it had been arri.;i-.")d to allow the ease to stand over until the 28th ins. ant. Adjourned accordingly. Venus Co. v. George Young. Claim for £2 Is Bd, for calls over due. Judgment by default for the amount claimed and costs. Banxockbitrn Co. v. Thos Gross. Claim for £\ 0s 10d, for calls. Judgment by default for amount claimed. Executors N. Ramsay v. Clvke. Claim for £4 3s 9d for goods supplied. Defendant hnd filed a sot off for ■£10, but at the Rnsrgestion of the Court withdrew it in order to sue for it separately. Judgment was given for the amount claimed aivl costs. Mr Jones for pi an tiff. Same v. Kikby. Case withdrawn, defendant having filed a declaration of bankruptcy. KILGOTJIt V. SWISBUBN AND P KTY. Claim for f 12, for mo of battery. Mr Jonos for pi an tiff. Mathfiw Swinburn : I wag partners with Hunt and another working the Lankey's Creek Cement ground. With the consent of my unites I wrt^te to Kilgour askimr him' what he would charge f<»r the use of the buttery to crush iniu he agroe.l '

to take £12, and the terms were accepted by the party ; we had one crushing and obtained ahmit 21b. weight; Hunt su-r---gestod that we should have a second ; crushing and that Ivilgour should theu be paid. l'-y Mr Hunt : Never told you or any ; body that Kilgour had ottered the use of the machinery f>r nothing ; Kilgour never made such an offer. John K. Hunt • In tho middle of August Swinburn called at my house and said that Kilgour had offered to let the battery froe to any party of men \vlv> would try the ground ; I therefore agreed to go with him and test the ground, and after we had got ready to crush certain thinirs were wanted and I anked Swinburn to write to Kilgour ; but T certainly did not authorise him to enter into any engagement with Kilgour ; we used the Lattery and obtained 240z 1.1 wt 17y,Ts of gold; nearly the whole of t lie proceeds of which wont, in expenses, our dividend being only £11 per mau for eleven weeks work. His Worship said it had been proved that Swinburn and defendant were mates ; the former had engaged the battery and it had been used for their joint benefit and the party was therefore liable. Judgment for the amount wich costs. Nesmtth v. Dttgo x. Claim for £6 12a for work and labor done at the reservoir. Andrew Nesmith : I was engaged by Duggan at 11/- a day to work at the reservoir for Smith and party ; T wrought for eight days and then knocked off; defendant refused to pay me until the work was finished ; the blocks for the boxes were only to be sunk two inches in the ground and instead of that they were eight or ten inches in the ground ; I complained to Mr Garvmi and he aaicl the race had been spoilt owing to Hie first section having been started too low. By Mr Lynch : T was either to go on at wages or to take up the contract and give Duggan £5 ; I did not agree to take over the contract ; I worked on theuoutraot at wages. Hugh Duggan : I am an hotelkeeper j and contractor residing in Reef ton ; too.? \ a sub contract from Smith to construct i 40 chains of water race for £'32 ; defen- j daut applied for work and I told him if he would give me i's he could have the contract and finish it himaelf ; he agreed to take the work over subject to the consent of the man who was mates with me : the man consented and defendant Ihyn i took over the work and after working te> days came back and aaid it would not \y. ■ y and demanded wages which I refused to pay. By plantiff : never told you that T would give you 12/- a. day ; never rold ; you that fifteen chains of the race w.'-> ; finished and passed by the surveyor ; I never mentioned wages to defendant. ' Thomas Watt ; I am a contractor ; on the 10th ult. Smith came to me and ink me I was wanted at Duggan's : I w.^u over and Duggan told me thathev.agoing to sell out the contract to Nesuik'i. and asked whether I would consent ; I '■ did consent and Nesmith worked for six clays and he then knocked off and afte v ;\ while he came back and said he could gut : no wages from Duggan and would therefore finish the job. Judgment for defendant with costs. Mr Lynch for defendant. Orient: ,yl Co. v. Sarah Axn Joni s. Claim for '5, being call of Gd per slia - >> on 200 shares. Judgment by default iw: the amount claimed and costs. Executor N. Rakhxyv. R. Lyxoh. Claim for 1"8 ISs 5d for goods supplied. Judgment by default for the amount wkh costs. Mr Jones for plantiff. Same v. Hemsley. Claim for £7 3s. Judgment for amount. Mr Jones for plantiff. Campbell v. McDonald. Claim for '4 2s, for cash lent. Judgment for amount. Dick v. Gittoes. Claim for £7 16s 4d fov goods supplier?. In this case the liability was aili'iii+fed but a defence of coverture was set up. I plantiff nonsuited. Smith v. Cochrane. This was an action of cli:-.puret! ac-ori ':h and on the application of Mr Jones ueve adjourned for a fortnight. Gross v. BcncuF. An action to recover damages for noncompletion of contract for sale of sbai'ca. J. B. Beeche : lam surcl by Thomas Gross of Dunedin, sharobroker. *or damages for non-fulfillment of an alleged con tract for purchase of 50 shares in the Welcome Company ; I received a telegram fiom James Stewart", late manager of Hi. National Bank, Duuedin. saying ; ' Wa.it buyer for 50 Welcomes close a^coiiiiis, j Can you quote. Kindly do best. — James Stewart." On the followiugday. 4ih July, I received a telegram from Thomas Gm>s, the present plantiff as follows : — i# Your offer accepted for fifty Welcomes. Four pounds. Will draw Stewart's account." Upon receipt of Stewart's telegram 1 i ned to sell his shares, but Ihe only offer vms from Mr Biennan for lif'oen at £4. !•.-*■> 2-i- per cent ; this* I wired to Mr Stewa.-'t ; Gross' telegram led me to believe that he was acting on Stewart's account ; I therefore wired "fifteen not fifty at four ponncis less 2A, draw on Brennan." On the 14. di July Mr Stewart wrote as follows: — "I am obliged also for your wire re Welcomes, I understood you had a buyer for only fifteen and I did nt care to break the parcel." On receipt of the letter I went to Brennan and told him Stewart would not break the parcel and I told hint the transaction was off, unless he otherwise kept me to it ; he replied it was no odd& as he could get them ; I subsequently received a telegram from Gross saying that he would draw for fifteen shares on Brennan but instead of that he drew on me, and I returned the draft. I subsequently received a letter from Gross saying that his transaction had nothing wha'ever to do with Stewart. I also received a telegram from Gross saying '• You authoiiseri me to draw on Brennau. Please protect draft. Again on the 20th he wired--"Draft for 15 Welcomes returned. I must insist on your taking them Will draw on you. I also received a letter dated 2nd August, which was in ruply to the first one explaining the whole matter. Had no communication with the plantiff previous to his wiring mo re Welcome shares on Stewart's account. The offer referring to the fifteen shares Mas not confirmed by Gross ; I treated Stewart as principal in the matter all through ; told Brenmin at the time that the shares belonged to Stewart : I was not acting as a broker but in si friendly way. Patrick Brennan : lam a sharobroker and remember having a conversation with Beeche early in the month of July. beeche came to my irih'co with a telegram from Stewart of D. merlin wanting a buyer 1 lor 3D Welcomes ; told him I had not a

buyer for such a large parcel but could place fifteen at £4 and wanted 2^ percent commission, some time after this Boeche showed me a telegram from Thomas Gross stating that 50 Welcomes had been purchased and not fifteen : Beeche said he would have to set the matter right as to the number, and some time after showed me a letter from S..e\vavt staling he would not break the parcel, and I then agreed that the sale should be off and obtained shares elsewhere.