SUPREME COURT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXV, Issue 170, 18 July 1894, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

THIS DAY.

SITTING IN BANCO,

I (Bsfore His Honor M r Justice Conolly.) Judgment.—Humphreys v. Moody (appeal). —This was an appeal from the decision of the Stipendiary Magistrate, of ! Opotiki, on matter of lace, in an action , bioupht by Thomas Mace Humphreys, solicitor, against Samuel Moody, to recover £74 16s, amount of a bill of costs. Judgment was given by the Magistrate for the defendant, and the plaintilf vow appealed against this decision on fact. Mr Cooper appeared for the appellant, Mr Cotter for the respondent.—His Honor now delivered judgment. He held that he would not iutertere with the Magistrate's decision as he had heard the witnesses, and there was conflicting evidence on both sides. The appeal was therefore dismissed, with costs £10 10s.

Motion to Quash Conviction*.-In tha matter of Tha Justices of tha Peace Acs, 1882, and of a conviction against Wiliiain Thompson (alias Tommy Kopeu) and Paua i Motion to quash a conviction recorded agiiiusb the defendants by a Magistrate and three Justices at Pukekohe, in connection with destroying survey pops on the , Opuatia block.— Ihia was a motion on behalf of the defendants to quash the conviction dated 15th of February, 1894, on the ground that the conviction is uncertain in its terms and not sufficiently described, nor shows on its face the jurisdiction ef the Justices and Magistrate to make such a conviction. Further the conviction is in excess of jurisdiction inasmuch as its terms made the goods and chattels of each of the defendants liable for distress and sale until be had paid tha penalty and costs awarded, and made each defendant liable to be imprisoned until he had paid the penalty.—Mr Fred Earl appeared in support of the motion, Mr J. A. Tole for the informant, Geo. S. Whiteeide, surveyor.— In opening-, Mr Earl stated that there had been no opportunity to move for tba quashing of the conviction until the time of the two months' imprisonment had expired, and the defendants, therefore, suffered punishment.— Argument of sonneel was then heard.—His Honor quashed tb« conviction.