R.M. Court Business.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume IV, Issue 570, 14 February 1891, Page 2

R.M. Court Business.

DISTRAINING FOR RENT. At the R.M, Court on Thursday morning His Worship gave judgment on the points raised by Mr Day in the C-ise A. Searle v. W. H. Tucker. Mr Chrisp with Mr Jones, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr A. W. Rees (for Mr D.iy) for the defence. The case had arisen over a sale by distress on a tenant. Mr Searle had bought the cattle, but defendant had sold them as if they were the property of the tenant, and Searle then sued for the vaiue, which counsel had agreed to place at £25. His Worship overruled the three nonsuit points raised by Mr Day, holding that the sale was not fraudulently contracted between the parties. Mr Rees said in view of His Worship’s decision there would be no evidence for the defence ; they would have to accept judgment. Judgment was then given for the plaintiff with costs. AN OVER SMART DEBTOR. Mr Nolan made application for an order for committal to Auckland gaol against Joseph Reed, against whom Mr W. Cooper had got judgment for £l3 Defendant had been at Wairoa races, drawn £ll in totalisator dividends ; he had also sold three horses, and received £7 for a house, lieturning from Wairoa on Saturday night, he had gone on to Auckland by the steamer on Sunday, so it was evident he wished to evade the judgment. There was a discussion as to what power His Worship had to make a committal to Auckland, and ho decided to make an order for immediate payment, or 14 days’ imprisonment in Mount Eden gaol. GOING TO LAW. A case which fittingly illustrates the perversity of human nature was Wade v. Joyce, both well known gentlemen. The claim was ostensibly one for £1 12d, for goods supplied. Cross-examination, however, elicited that the real matter in dispute was that Mr Joyce and Mr Wade had disagreed on a settlement of accounts between them, with the result that the latter agreed to take back a pump and fixings which had been erected by him, and the balance of the account was paid. Tho bone of contention was as to who should take down the pump. Each party thought the other should do it, and it was stated that half an hour’s work would have been sufficient. However, the plaintiff sued the defendant for the price of the goods. His Worship asked Mr Wade why didn’t he take the pump down, and the latter entered into a long explanation, with the result that he was advised to go and take it down aud have no more trouble about it. The plaintiff was therefore nonsuited, with 9s costs. This trivial matter will cost 18j in cash, besides which four persons and a solicitor were kept about Court nearly all day. Mr Jones appeared for the defendant. CLAIM FOR WAGES. Kenneth G, McKenzie sued George Arundel, of Tiniroto, for £6 17s, balance of wages alleged to be due. Mr A. Rees appeared for plaintiff, and Mr DeLautour for defendant. Plaintiff s version was that he had worked seven weeks and odd days at 25s a week and found. At settling up he had affixed hia mark to the cheque book as a receipt, but disagreed about the amount given. Thereupon Arundel had threatened to slap him in the mouth if he asked for more, and McKenzie retorted that he would sue for the amount. Defendant’s evidence was a flat contradiction of the plaintiff's. lie said that on the cheque being given plaintiff was thoroughly satisfied and made no complaint of any kind ; he could read, though he said he could not write, and fully understood that it was a final settlement. Mr Rees wanted the books produced. Mr DeLautour objected to this. His Worship said that when, as had been stated, a servant earning 25s a week was charged with 5s a day for drink he was inclined to look on the thing with suspicion, and if desired would adjourn the case for the books to be produced. Mr DeLautour said that the duty to prove lay with the other side, and if every swagman, after having a proper account and been given a receipt, were allowed to repudiate it in this fashion the Courts would have a good deal more work than they should care to undertake j even tha drinks could not be objected to at that stage, the privilege not having been availed of at the time. His Worship : But plaintiff says he did express dissatisfaction at the time of settling up -at present I have one man’s word against another’s. Mr DeLautour contended th it the onus of proof lay with the prosecution, which must do more than balance evidence, Mr Rees said ha would allow Mr Arundel to refresh his memory with the items he had written down, and then he would take exception to the drink charges—the receipt not being stamped, he pointed out it was not a legal one. Mr Arundel then explained that the a day for drink was accounted for by McKenzie having a habit of “shouting” for people—some days he had no drink at all, while some of the charges were for tobacco and such things as a pocket knife. Judgment was eventually given for 15s, an amount which the plaintiff claimed the day after giving the receipt. The cos's amounted to £1 Ils. NATIVES ANP THEIR WAGES. Harawera sued two other natives, Morell brothers, for £7 9s 31, which he alleged to be bis share in a contract for cutting grass seed. Mr Day for plaintiff, and Mr Finn for one of the defendants, James. Judgment for £4 0s 6d was given by default against the other brother, with costs. DISPUTED SERVICES. In the case Watson v, Brown, claim £5 10s on account of stud services by plaintiff’s stallion, Mr DeLautour decided to accept a nonsuit, after hearing the evidence. Mr Finn appeared on behalf of defendant. STOLEN GRASS SEED. Yesterday Tehira Kepo was charged with knowingly receiving saveii sacks of stolen gram seed, the property (ll Mr O. A. Brown. Mr Day defended. After going into the evi denoe, Sergeant Carlyon asked leave to withdraw the charge as against the accused.