MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Evening Star, Issue 19559, 18 May 1927, Page 9

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

YESTERDAY’S SITTING. (Before Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M.) RACING DEAL. The hearing was continued of the case in which David Hawton Jones (Mr Paterson), an hotelkeeper at Beaumont, claimed £64 Os 6d from Joseph Frederick Jones (Mr J. S. Sinclair), a retired sheep farmer, the principal items in the claim being for nomination, acceptance, and riding fees, ana railage paid by plaintiff on behalf or defendant in connection with deiendant’s racehorses registered in plaintiffs name. Defendant I counter-claimed £45, .being for goods supplied and an amount of £3O paid to R. C. Reed on behalf of plaintiff by the defendant. Robert Cecil Reed, a trainer, Oj Wmgatui, said that Marmont had been sent to him after Easter of last year. Witness’s brother had asked him to take the horse home from the Beaumont meeting, where witness rode one or plaintiff’s horses. Witness was not particularly.. keen, as the horse was not much good. Harry Jones then asked him what fees, he would take the horse for, and when the matter had been referred to plaintiff the latter had said he did not'care. Marmont had arrived at Wingatui without warning, and witness had started to train the horse. Ho had met Harry Jones at a Forbury Park trotting meeting, and had been told; “Don’t send the accounts to the hotel. The women don’t like us racing.” David Jones had said“ I think that is the best way.” Witness did not know that plaintiff was not the owner of the horse. After several communications by telephone in an endeavor to secure payment witness had put the’ matter in the hands of a solicitor, and then plaintiff had told him that he would not pay, as he'did not own the i horse. Defendant had then .paid the account. Plaintiff had told him to sell Marmont. ,■ • , „ 1K Mr claimed that the iio owing for meat was not a legitimate counter-claim. The Magistrate said that plaintiff, in giving evidence, had made a poor showing. He was satisfied that plaintiff knew all about the arrangement in regard to the training of Marmont. It was absurd to suggest that the horse bad been spirited av'av without plaintiff knowing it. From Reed’s evidence it was plain that he was justified in dealing with David Jones. Defendant was, therefore, entitled to recover £3O: hut on the claim for £ls for meat he would , be nonsuited. Most of tbo items of the claim had been admitted. He was not impressed with Joseph Jones’s evidence. Tn fact, there was little to choose between the two He found himself in a difficult position, and it would be only speculation on his part if he decided in favor of one_ or the other. As tbo maioritv of the items were admitted. however, iudgment would be given for plaintiff for £43 TOs fid, with costs. Defendant was entitled to recover £3O on the counter-claim, and no would bo allowed witness’s expenses in regard to Reed. TENEMENT CASE.

Agues Tuckey (Mr A. C. Stephens) claimed from John Cunningham (Mr B. Thomson) possession of a house at No. 19 Melbourne street, and rent clue amounting to £9 5s 6d.—L. Tuckey, husband of plaintiff, said that his wife was in a very bad state of health. She owned Nos. i? and 19 Melbourne street. She had occupied No. 17 until recently, when she had left the house in order to 20 to Christchurch. * She had suddenly taken a bad turn, however, and was unable to travel. Witness and his wife were at present staying at an hotel, but a doctor had advised her to get into a house of her own. Witness considered No, 19 more suitable than No. 17. After hearing defendant’s evidence the Magistrate stated that this was, no doubt, a case of considerable hardship, hut he could not overlook the tenant. He did not see any reason why the tenant of No. 19. who had been in the house for four years, should he put out before the tenant of No. 17, who had been in the house only a few_ months. No order would he mode, hut judgment would he given for the rent and costs (£2 6sl. HEARING ADJOURNED.

Henry John Brooks claimed from John Butler, of Clarksville, £49 on tho grounds that defendant had failed to comnly with the terms of the lease of a property in Leith Valiev, Plaintiff was represented bv Mr C. J. L. "White, and Mr P. R. Anderson appeared for defendant.—Plaintiff Rave _ evidence that when Butler’s lease expired in 1922 the farm was in n state of d’srenair. Fences were broken, and the property was overrun with noxious weeds. "Defendant bad sub-let a house +o a man who bad 1-out fowls in it. Plaintiff and others bad spent °omo weeks in repairin' l- the damage.—" Daniel Smith, a hospital assistant. said -that be bad teen emnloved bv Plaintiff in clearing tho aronnd of weeds and in repairin' l- fences.— Atfcort Rtewart, Brooks nnvo evidonco similar to +Vt of bis father, and the ease. w ll ieh bod occupied most of +ho afternoon, was adjourned unCl Tuesday next.