HAWERA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume II, Issue 166, 31 October 1881, Page 4

HAWERA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thubsday, October 27Tir, 1881.

Before Captain Wray, K.M.

Brickett v. Vickery. — Claim for SA. This was a case in which defendant's •evidence was to be taken, in order that it might be forwarded to Waikato, the dispute being in reference to the renting of a blacksmith's shop at Te Awamutu. Defendant admitted haying be< n in occupation, but pleaded a set-off to nearly the full amount. The Magistrate informed him, that as he had not given notice, the plea of set-off could not be admitted. He mußt proceed by separate action. However, his evidence in reference to the items was taken.

CJirystal v. Moir.— Claim, for £35 18a., \m&i>Xi&b oS aceoiiok Sox- woiit hone.

Mr. Parringbon for pkiatiff, Mr. Barleynian for defendant. Plaintiff stated that he was a farm laborer residing at Normanby, and did certain work for defendant at Eltham, which had not been paid for. Defendant denied liability. After a long inquiry, the Bench gave judgment for defendant. Duff v. Fitzsimmons. — Claim for £2 9s. Bd., goods supplied. Defendant admitted the debt, but said he had not paid because he believed lie had a contra claim against plaintiff. However, he found he was mistaken, and therefore would accept judgment. Costs, 7s. Same v. McNerny.— Claim for iJIO 15s. Judgment by default. Costs, 19s. Same v. Pitt.— Claim for £5 os. 9d. De/euclant's wife denied that some of the articles charged were delivered. Alfred Kirk proved the delivery of the goodi. Judgment for plaintiff. Barker v. Langley.— ln this caße— an action in the Patea Court for the recovery of money for timber supplied— the following evidence was taken : — Wm. O'Brien, builder, residing at Manaia, remembered a conversation between plaintiff and defendant, on the occasion of the former selling timber to the latter. Mr. Langley ■called him over, and in reply to a question as to the price of lining, Mr. Barker 6aid the timber would bo 14s. 6d. per 100. The timber supplied by Messrs. Southey and Willy would be quite equal, if not more than equal, to that supplied by Mr. Barker, and could be bought at 15s. per 100. — To Mr. Barker: Ido not know as a feet that Messrs. Southej and Willy were at that titue. supplying timber at 15s» per 100. I did not notice that anyone else was present; there might have been someone else there.

Shearer, Nicoll, and Co. v. Tingey. — Claim for £4 11s. Id. Judgment by default; costs, 7s.

Whittaker Bros. v. Emerton.—Judgment summons. Defendant said he had not been able to satisfy the judgment. He had only been earning 30s. a week He would pay it in two months. Adjourned for two months. Moir v. Boy. — Judgment summons ; amount due, £5. Plaintiff said defendant's wife had admitted having the necessary money to satisfy the judgmeut, but had spent it. Defendant stated he had been getting 6s. 6d. a day. He had told plaintiff if ho called his wife would pay part of the bill, but he did not call. He had six children to keep. — Adjourned ior a month.

England v. Brady. — Behearing previous •decision upheld. A judgment summons issued against defendant was postponed.