ASHBURTON- THURSDAY. Mr 0. A. Wray, R.M.) ALLEGED LARGER 7, E. Sohnitz was charged with having Stolen two loads of firewood, of the value of £1, and the property of J. McKesge, from Lowollffe, about November 26, — Jas MoKeage said th*t he was m receipt > of authority from the manager to collect -* s tramp wood for firewood on the Lowoliff; estate. He stacked about four loads on the roadside, and about three weeks afterwards found that ■ portion had been taken away. He had no permission to leave the wood on the roaa. — J. R, Brodie, manager of the Lowcllffe estate, stated that he gave acoused permission to gather a load or two of firewood from the swamp. He bad also given permission to A^pKeage, The latter instead of taking the wood away Immediately, stacked It for some time on the side of the road. Witness knew nothing of the alleged larceny — Thomas Smith, bullock driver at Lowollffe, missed a load of wood from McKeage's heap, Did not see aoonsed take any wood— John Bellman, another bullookdriver, saw SehnHz take wood from Mc&eage's heap. Aoaoaed aald that Mr Brodie gave him permission to take it. Witness replied that Mr Brodle's permission only had referenoo to taking wood from the swamp, and not from MoKeage'a heap. Aocused when remonstrated with adopted a threatening attitude— Accused denied the testimony of the last witness* He did not take any wood, nor did be "obeek" the witness— Acoused called bis wife, Mary Sennits, who said that she was with her husband during the time he was gathering wcod. He got the wood In the paddooka and atscked It on the roadside, from whenoe he carted it away. He did not take any from McKeage's heap. Acoused made a statement similar m purport to his wife's evidence — The police gave accused a good charaoter— The Magistrate said there was a doubt m the case, of which he would give the aocused the benefit. The case would be dismissed, " OHXAP'JACK " OB HAWKBB. Jobn Lethaby, was charged, on an Information laid by direction of the Ashburton Borough Council, with a breach of By-law 104 of the Borough By laws, by trading as a hawker without being licensed ■o to do. — Mr Orisp for the Oounoll, Mr Gutbbertson for the defendant.— o. E. Fooka, town clerk, produoed formal documents. The portion of the railway tCßjrve at Burnett Street was within the Borough. Lethaby had never applied for • lioense. — By Mr Oathbertson: The Hindoo hawkers had not got licenses. No hawkers licenses had been taken out. — Constable Oasey said that on Saturday Nov. 17 he saw defendant on the railway reset va. He had » hawker's cart with a miscellaneous assortment of goods, which he was selling. Saw him sell certain artloles for which he received money. Witness asked him if he had a lioense, defendant replied that be did not require one.— By Mr Outh> fortion: Defendant remained m one place the whole of the time he was selling. Defendant had a shop m the town. —Mr Cuthbertson said there was no evidence of hawking. A hawker was one who carried his goods from place to place and vended them. The defendant was what was known as alf cheap jack." The alleged offenoa took place on the railway reserve, and waa therefore beyond the control of the CounclL—Mr Orlop replied, 2?o definition was given In the Act of what a hawker wai, but a " cheap jack " came within the popular definition of a bawker. As to the offence taking place on the railway reserve, that reserve was within the Borough, and the Council's by-law applied to It. — The Magistrate said that be understood that defendant had a shop within the Borough. — Defendant said that snob was the case. —The Magistrate reserved hla decision on the polnti raised — J. Lethaby said that ha had a shop In the Borough. He held » Dutch auotlon on the railway reserve on the day m question. .He had never hawked goods within the Borough.— By Mr Crlip : Had his shop for seven or eight months. — The Magistrate reserved hit decision till next Oourt day. civil cases. J. G. Restell v J. Graham, claim lla 6d. Judgment for plaintiff by default for •mount olalmed and costi. J. G. Reitell v R. Patton, olalm 14s Id, Judgment for plaintiff by default for amount olalmed and costs. O. Ray v S. Hardley, claim £4 16a. Mr Purnell for plaintiff, Mr Clayton for defendant. The clsim was for repairs to ft reaper and binder* Plaintiff gave evidence to having contracted to repair the machine, but had given no guarantee that the machine would last the season. He held S. Hardley, junr,, responsible for the oost of repairs, as it was from him he had the order to repair the machine. Subsequently, plaintiff went up to Laurlsion to look at the maobine, but had been unable to go at the time defendant was Dotting hU or op, Tho >op*lte h»d barm •peolfied at the time the oontraot was made. Defendant had made no oomplalnt about the work till some months after it had been executed. — George Hoaten deposed that hesaw the maobine m Ray's yard. It was an old nuohlne. He afterwards •aw the machine at Lanrlston, and it then looked as though it had done a fair •mount of work —James Keif aleo gave •vldenoe.— Defendant said that ha agreed with plaintiff to repiir the maohine and he gave a verbal guarantee that it would fast the season. After the repairs were done defendant went to plaintiffs yard for the machine, and plaintiff then said he would gnarantee the machine to be m good working order. The machine was taken to Lsurlston, but It could not be got to work, as the wire was constantly breakIng. Witness refused to p»y for the repairs because he had had to go to considerable expense with the maohine before h« oonld get It to work. Witness was a tinsmith by trade ; m fact he oonld do a little at everything.— F, Parkin deposed to hearing plaintiff tell defendant that the machine would work. It w»s taken to Lauriston, bat was so muoh out of order that defendant had to borrow a machine to out bis crop.— Walter Hardley deposed - that tbo maohine would not work when it was tried m the crop. The maobine was takes to the blacksmith's, bat with no better result*.— George Page gave similar evidenoe. — S. Hardlay, senr., . Mid he was the owner of the maebine. ■^Plaintiff waited on him for payment of the and witness told htm he ought ; HHfcbe ashamed to ask for the money after fl^^Awsy the work had bean dene.— JudgH|^^^o r plaintiff for the amount claimed j^MKCOQTtIthjD ion, I
Permanent link to this item
MAGISTERIAL., Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 2018, 20 December 1888
MAGISTERIAL. Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 2018, 20 December 1888
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.