ASHBURTON.— Friday, July IG. ‘ (Before Mr. F. Guinness, R.M.) OBTAINING MONEY UNDER FALSE PRETENCES. Maurice Kane, who. had' been apprehended on a warrant, was charged with having obtained L 3 from James Hume under false pretences. Mr. Ireland for accused. Clement George Bushel, sworn, said— On the 11th June accused told me he had some work to do at Mr. Cameron’s, and that he would take me on, and give me a share of the work in common with the others who were going. I went on Saturday and returned on the same day, because we could not find the place, as prisoner was not with us. On telling accused we could not find the place, he said he would go and show us. He went with us on the Sunday, and left us at Mr. Tisch’s, where we stayed until Tuesday. We then found out that accused had no contract there. We were on Cameron’s ground, when the shepherd told us that if Mr. Cameron caught us there he would make it hot for us. 1 told him Kane had given us a job there on a contract for fencinsr. The shepherd said Kane had no contract there. Kaiie asked Hume on one occasion for L2 until the contract was done. Kane said he had money in the hank, but could not get it out. When he came hack he told me they would not give him any, as there was none in the bank to the credit of his name. By Mr. Ireland—Accused distinctly told me that he had the job. The money was advanced to accused to get things for the work. lam quite certain prisoner said he had obtained the contract at Mr. Cameron’s. Don’t know whether accused got anything with the L2. According to What the shepherd told us, I know that Kane had no contract at Cameron’s. P. H. Guy, sworn—l am ledger-keeper in the Bank of Hew Zealand. Ho one named Maurice Kane has an account in the Bank of New Zealand. James Hume, sworn, said —On the 11th June accused came ffo me, and told me he had got a job of fencing to do at Mr. Cameron’s place—“new-chum Cameron’s,” he said. The price he said, at first, was 3s. 2d., and then 3s. 4d. Showed accused a cheque for LlO 4s. He said his money had run out, and I told him I would let him have LI, and he was to pay it back after the contract was completed. He would not take the money unless I went with him. The same evening saw accused again. I asked him if I should take tools with me. He said he had sufficient tools. Before going to the job he asked me for another LI. He said he had money in the bank, and if ho could not pay it out of the contract, he would draw money from the bank to pay hack the advances. Heard him, on onet'occasiou, tell Mrs. Harper he had L2O in the bank. There were five of us when we went up to Cameron’s. Ted Ede drove us up. The conveyance was engaged by accused. He told us to go to Tisch’s, as it was too late to camp, and he went back to Ashburton on Monday. Went to Cameron’s, and was told that Mr. Cameron had no land there. Came back to Ashburron. Could not find Kane, and have not seen him since. Altogether he has had L 3 from me. which I let him have on the strength of the contract. Would not have let him have the money if he had not made the statement. William R. Metcalfe, deponed that he kept a boarding-house in Ashburton. When I asked accused for his week’s board, he said he would pay me, but he has not done so. After Mr. Ireland had addressed the Bench, his Worship characterised the conduct of accused as that of gross deception throughout, and sentenced prisoner to six months’ imprisonment, with hard labor. CIVIL CASES. Borough Council v. W. Smith. Claim L2 55., unpaid rates. Mr. C. Braddell appeared for the Council. Judgment by default for amount and costs ss. Little v. Bradshaw.—Claim LlO, balance of an unpaid order. Mr. Purnell for plaintiff; Mr. O’Reilly for defendant. After the plaintiff’s evidence had been taken, Mr. O’Reilly raised a nonsuit point, which, after argument, his Worship allowed, with costs. Mr. Purnell gave notice of appeal.
RAKAlA.— Tiirusday, July 16.
(Before Mr. F. Guinness, R.M.) STRAY CATTLE.
I. Boucher, for tethering a cow across a public thoroughfare, was fined ss. W. Doherty, for allowing one cow to wander at large in the township, was fined 10s. CIVIL CASES. • W. Hartnall v. H. ‘Bmithcrs. Claim Ll 4 19s. 6jd. Judgment for plaintiff, by default, with costs 15s. W. Hartnall v. Latto. Claim L2O 19s. ss. Judgment for plaintiff, by default, with costs 20s. James Wilkinson v. Scott. Mr. Purnell for plaintiff ; Mr. Holmes for defendant. This was a claim for board and lodging for defendant’s wife who came Rakaia to stay a few r weeks. Plaintiff swore that when Mrs. Scott came his place he told her as broadly as possible that she could not stay there, and offered to introduce her to Mrs. Ratter. She, however, stayed on, and finally had almost to be pitched out of the house. He did not know anything of the woman, but was on friendly terms with her husband. Defendant stated that she had bean invited to plaintiffs house to stay without ■anything being said about payment. She stayed there a week, and then went to Mrs. Ratter’s. Plaintiff wanted her to come back again to his place.
After counsel on both sides had addressed the Bench, his Worship gave jugment for defendant, with costs, L2.
J. Scott v. Wilkinson.—Claim Ll 6. Counsel for plaintiff, Mr. Holmes; for defendant, Mr. Purnell. John Scott, sworn, said —I am plaintiff in this case. In May, 1878, I sold defendant one cow for Ll2. I also sold him two cows for L 24. I also lent him one cow, for the hire of which he was to give me two heifer calves. I never got the calves. The fair value or hire for a cow in milk I consider to be ss. per week. After the cow I lent him came home I made 19s. a week on the milk I sold from her. Received Lll on the first cow I sold defendant, and L2O on the two others. Defendant got the cow in March, 1878. By Mr. Purnell -Defendarat agreed io give me heifer calves for the hire of the cow. I made no claim till summoning defendant. I never made enquiry why the calves had never been delivered to me.
Mrs. Scott, sworn, said—l am the wife of the plaintiff in this case. Know the cow in question. Got her back from defendant in March, 1879. I made 10s. a week from her milk. James Wilkinson, sworn, said—l am defendant in this case. The plaintiff bought a cow for me. The price was Lll. He charged LI for driving. I was to pay nothing for driving the cow. It is quite recently that plaintiff claimed for driving. In paying for the two cows I explained to him that the L 4 short paid was to pay me for expenses I had incurred on account of his daughter. Plaintiff offered to lend me a cow if I would rear her calf. It was agreed that I should give him two calves for the use of the cow. The value of the calves when weaned would be about Ll each. Plaintiff’s cow was near calving when I got her. She came to me in May, 1878. She calved in June. I kept her till March, 1879. Plaintiff never applied for the return of the cow. I was prepared to return her at any moment. She would be a good cow if in proper condition. She was as poor as a crow and full of vermin when I got her. I sent the two calves to Sydney Polls. The value of his calf was nil The cow was with me so long because Scott never fetched her away. Plaintiff never sent me a bill for this claim till he summoned me.
By Mr. Holmes—The cow gave about eight quarts of milk a day while I had her. I sold the milk at 4d. per quart. The usual charge for grazing a cow is 2s. 6d. per week. I sent the two calves to Sydney Rolls’, about two miles from plaintiff’s. After they had been there about twelve months, I fetched them away and sold them. I had to pay for their keep. By His Worship—Plaintiff never gave me orders to send the calves to Sydney Rolls.
Plaintiff recalled—by Mr. Holmes— Defendant never' sent me word till months afierjhat he had sent the calves to Ralls, and then they were gone. I never went or sent for the calves.
His Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for Lll os. and costs, LI 19s. A. Devery v. Trustees in estate of Wm. Leslie, Chertsey. Counsel for plaintiff, Mr. Holmes ; for defendants Mr. Purnell. Plaintiff had agreed to cut the crop on Leslie’s estate, he finding the horses and drivers ; defendant finding the machines. Plaintiff owed defendants for work done and repairs to machines. During the progress of the work Devery obtained a promissory note from defendants for L 75, which he had some difficulty in cashing, naving to pay L 5 3s. 7d. for the accommodation. Defendants contended that Devery had no authority to incur expense for repairs, that the machines were handed to him in good working order, and that the amount charged for cashing the promissory note was excessive. They also claimed L 25, value of an Osborne machine which had been damaged through plaintiff’s horses bolting. A great deal of evidence was taken as to the value of second-hand machines, and also to the competence of Devery’s men, and the quality of his horses. The case occupied the Bench till nearly four p.m., when Counsel decided to leave the case in his Worship's hands without further argument. Verdict for plaintiff’, less L 25, value of the machine destroyed, and the commission on the promissory note, and costs.
Permanent link to this item
R.M. COURTS., Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 127, 17 July 1880
R.M. COURTS. Ashburton Guardian, Volume 1, Issue 127, 17 July 1880
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.