RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3536, 7 November 1882, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

This Day.

(Before Captain Preece, 8.M.) DRUNKENNESS.

Thomas Brown, charged with having been drunk at Clive yesterday, pleaded guilty, and was dismissed with a caution, on the understanding that he would return to hie work in the country.

James Shaw Chase, charged with having been drunk at Taradale yesterday, pleaded guilty, and was fined 5s and costs, with the usual alternative. VAGBANCT. The same prisoner was further charged with being a vagrant having no lawful visible means of support, to which charge he pleaded not guilty, stating that he could always get plenty to eat and drink. If allowed his liberty he would proceed at once to Patoka, where he was promised a "job," and he would n»t be seen in this side of the country for the nezt six months. Mr Laecelles eaid, if he might be allowed to make a suggestion, he thought it would be better if, instead of committing the old man to gaol, he were assisted to obtain relief from his sons, who were all (with one exception) earning good wages. His Worship took the same view of the case, and dismissed the information, remarking that the accused was entitled to be supported by his sons, he being evidently unfitted to earn his own livelihood. CIVIL CASES. Hoggard v. Smith and Walker.— Adjonraed case. On the application of Mr Lee the case was further adjourned to December sth. O'Brien v. S. Hunt, junr.—Claim £12 6s, amount of dishonored order and costs. Judgment for plaintiff, by default, for amount claimed, with costs and counsel's fee £1 Is. Mr Lascelles appeared for the plaintiff. Blackwell v. V. G. Day.—Claim £2 ss, balance of account due. Judgment, by default, for plaintiff, for amount claimed, with costs Bs. Parker (Borough rate collector) v. Joeeph Foreman.—Claim £7 3s 2d for overdue rates. Defendant admitted the claim, and offered to pay by instalments. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs and counsel's fee 10a 6d, the judgment to be paid in instalments of 30a per month. Mr Logan appeared for the plaintiff. Same v. Ellen Gill.—Claim £8 5a 9d for rates. Defendant said she had a large family to keep, and was unable to pay rates. Her husband left her nine years ago, and she bad no maintenance from him since. In answer to the Court defendant said she could not pay £l a month in extinction of the debt. Judgment was then given for amount claimed with costs only, payable in monthly instalments of 15s each. Mr Logan said, in the event of it being found that the defendant was really unable to pay, the Council would take its remedy against the property. Same v. Franklin.—Claim £10 4s for rates. Mr Logan for the plaintiffs. Defendant said he was unable to pay, unless time was allowed him. He was a billiard marker, earning 30s a week, and had a family of nine children to keep, only one of whom was receiving wages. On the suggestion of Mr Logan, His Worship made an order for payment of the amount, with costs, in monthly instalments of 30a each.

Selig v. Snellen —Claim £2 75., for goods sold and delivered. Judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed, with costs 10s.

Miles v. Warnes.—Claim £10 for work done in removing night soil, &c. Mr Lascelles appeared for the defendant, and Mr Lee for the plaintiff. Mr Lascelles said his client was prepared to accept judgment for £6 with costs, which amount would have been paid into Court only that Mr Warnes was rather late ia consulting him. Mr Lee said the amount was not sufficient, and he would prefer to allow the case to proceed.—The contention of the defendant was that the charge made was excessive, and that the work was not so difficult as the plaintiff represented it to be. The place was also left in bad repair. His Worship said he considered the charge was rather excessive, but there was no doubt the work was different from ordinary work of a similar description. Judgment would be given for £,7 10s, with costs Us, plaintiff's expenses 6s, and counsel's fee£l Is. Pocock v. McCormack.- Claim £10 6d for rent due. Mr Lee appeared for the defendant, and denied that there was any rent due. He would also possibly set up a legal defence on the evidence. The plaintiff was examined by Mr Lee, and admitted that the rent account was commenced in a book kept anterior to that produced in Court. Witness always collected the rent himself, and gave receipts for it. The defendant never worked for plaintiff at any time. There never was any lease or writing in the matter. Mr Lee contended that this was not really a claim for rent. If Mr Pocock had a claim at all it was for use and occupation, and the defendant waa entitled to prove such occupation, which Mr Pocock, he believed, could not do. The defendant was also entitled to a detailed account showing credit?, and if such were rendered it would come out that there was, as a matter of fact, nothing due whatever. His Worship said that clearly the whole of the transaction should be shown from the beginning, and the plaintiff muet therefore be nonsuited, with costs and solicitor's fee £1 Is.

Hollis v. Manaena Tini— Claim £11 18a 3d for goods sold and delivered. Adjourned by the Court for a fortnight. beveral other cases were either etrrjck; out or settled.