RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume 6, Issue 332, 8 November 1862, Page 6

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wednesday, Nqvembeb 5. John Mastebson was fined 10s for drunkenness or in default, 48 hours imprisonment. Committed in default. Fkeday, November 7. Samuel Harrington was fined 10s. for drunkenness ; and John Moon ss. for a like offence. Langan v. Hamon. This was a claim for £1 9s 6d for board and lodging, and maintenance of ! defendant's child. The plaintiff was non-suited — the defendant, though since married, having been sued as bfemme sole. Barry v. Flanagan, This was a complaint of assault and forcibly taking possession of certain papers the property of complainant. Case dismissed. Tiffenw. Eustace and William Fannin. This was an information under the Scab Act. Plaintiff had inspected 5 sheep in the flock of defendants and had found them to be scabby. It turned out however that these sheep were the property of an adjoining runholder; and the Inspector could not prove that any of defendants' own sheep were infected. Mr. Tiffen maintained that, under the terms of the Act, where one scabby sheep was seen in a flock the whole flock was deemed to be diseased. The Bench, however, thought otherwise, and dismissed the case. Tiffen v. Walker. This was another information under the Scab Act. Plaintiff had only seen 20 sheep the property of defendant and had found them, to be scabby. Defendant was an occupant of a Maori run ; he (Mr. Tiffen) had been instructed to refnse the assessments^rrom occupants of such, and did not consider he had power to order defendant to muster. Information sustained and defendant ordered to pay 6d a head penalty for the 20 sheep, and costs. Newton v. Northe. Claim for debt, £12 19 s 3d. Judgment confessed for the whole amount. Costs, 9s. Paton v. Allen. This was an action brought for an assault alleged to have been committed by defendant on plaintiff's child. This case was a trumpery one and the evidence conflicting. The Bench dismissed the case — the costs, 10s 6d, to be borne by the litigants in equal proportions. Charlton v. Tiffen. This was an action to recover £20, the value of a foal, the property of plaintiff, which was sent to Greenmeadows to ! depasture, and which was not to be found when delivery was demanded. The foal was taken, it appeared, at the rate of Is. a week, and it was ' contended on behalf of defendant that so small a charge could not be supposed to imply responsibility on his part, and that he was not therefore liable. Judgment given for defendant.