RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3078, 9 May 1881, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

MONDAT, MAY 9.

(Before H. Eyre Kenny, Esq. R.M.) DRUNKENNESS,

Thomas McManus and W. Thompson, charged with this offence, were each fined 5a and costs, or 48 hours. Michael Ryan, charged with the same offence, did not put in an appearance, and bis bail was estreated. CIVIL CASES. Williams v. Hughes, claim, £9 6a Bd. Judgment for plaintiff with costs. Newton v. Rees, claim £13 9s 6d. Judgment for plaintiff for £12 8s 6d, vith,costs and counsel's fee.

Neagle v. Steele, claim £8 7s lOd. Judgment for plaintiff with costs. Bowes v. T. Whelan, claim £9 9s sd. Judgment for plaintiff with costs and counsel's fee.

Jones v. W. Caulton, claim £1 ss. In this case there was no appearance of plaintiff, and defendant, who was represented by Mr Lascelles, was allowed his costs and counsel's fee.

Child v. Shirley.—The plaintiff sued defendant for the sum of £4 for the detention of a box and clothing. It appeared from the evidence that plaintiff had seen an advertisement in a Wellington paper for a second waiter. He applied, and was engaged to come to Napier. On his arrival Mr Shirley said that if he stayed six months he would pay his fare from Wellington. It was discovered that he had no experience as a waiter, and Mr Shirley discharged him. Plaintiff then agreed to leave a coat as guarantee for his passage money, but afterwards wanted to take awny his box and all his clothes. Mr Shirley was willing that he should take away all bis property except the coat, which he had agreed to leave as security. The plaintiff then got out a summons. His Worship said the plaintiff had acted foolishly in proceeding as he did. The defendant was quite willing to let him have bis property, with the exception of the portion which he had agreed to leave. He would have to pay the costs of the case. Mr Lascelles, who appeared for the plaintiff, said that, under the circumstances, he would not ask for his fee. His Worship said that plaintiff might think himself very fortunate in getting off so lightly in consequence of Mr Lascelles not pressing for his fee.

Ruddick v. Gardner and Olsen, claim £5 10s 6d. Mr Lascelles appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Lee for defendants. Mr Lascelles in opening the case, said that public attention had been much directed of late to the question of the propriety of private individuals roving the country and driving straying cattle to the pound. It Was undoubtedly a great nuisance that people who did not own an acre of ground should own horses, and turn them out upon the public roads, to the injury of the roads, and the annoyance of people into whose paddocks they got. The proper way would surely be that the local bodies should have a paid ranger whose duty it should be to attend to stray cattle. There was a strong suspicion that recently a good many cases had occurred where these roving impounders had entered private enclosures and driven off horses to the pound. Of course

Buoh cases were very difficult to prove, as the offence was committed late at night .or in the early morning, and the offenders were careful that they should not be seen. In this case, however, a man was looking on while the defendants entered plaintiff's paddock and drove his horses to the pound.—Frank Stanley, sworn, said he was a butcher at West Clive. On the morning of the 14th of April be was going to his work about 5 o'clock in the morning. He passed a paddock belonging to Mr Ruddick. He saw two men riding on the road. They were the defendants. He saw them in the paddock driving out two horses. The horses doubled and got back into the paddock, and the men drove them out again, and drove them towards the pound. The defendants, were the men he saw. He knew Gardner well, and was perfectly certain it was he—The witness was cross-examined by Mr Lee at considerable length,—The plaintiff and defendant's was also examined, and at the conclusion of the evidence His Worship gave judgment for the plaintiff for full amount claimed, and costs of Court and witnesses and counsel's fee. When our report left the Court was still sitting.