TO-DAY'S COURT.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume L, Issue 8999, 23 January 1906, Page 7

TO-DAY'S COURT.

(Before Mr A. Turnbull, S.M.)

JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT.

In the following cases judgment was givtin by default: — G. Moore v. Samu-rt Dak; claim, £7 14s 2d J. W. Hirst v. S. Dale; claim £21 ss. J. Livingston and F. McGuire v. D. Q. C. Gebbie, claim £79 8s 2d. McKoy and Co. v. Walter Harrison, claim £3 11s Bd. W. Spence v. John Hair; claim £2 be

A. H. Foy v. J. A. Gomteon, claim £5 W. Spence v. Hugft Johnstone ; claim 12s 6d. „.,,. F. HaTmon v. James Mmhinnick : claim 15s.

BOARDING A MOVING TRAIN. Edward PatEereon was charged by the police with boarding a train while it wae in motion. A telegram from the police constable at Taihape was handed in and stated that defendant would not appear but pleaded guilty. H. J. Day (stationmaeter at Hawera) 6tated that the case was a bad one and one in which the defendant might caeily have been thrown under the train. After the train started defendant hung on to 6peak to sonwone and jumped off again. A fine of £1 and coets was inflicted, in default one week*6 imprisonment. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES.

Herbert Headley (cab driver) claimed £"15 10s from Clarke and Higginson (stable proprietors) for damages done to hie cab. The damage was alleged to be the result of a collision near Syme's mill in Princes street, on the second day of the Egmont A. and P. Show. Headley was driving to the station and the other cab was coming from the station. Mr Barton, for the plaintiff, stated that Headley was driving on the-proper side of Princes street, and observed Clarke and Higginson's employee (J: Jones) coming up at a hand gallop on the wrong side of the road and apparently regardless of what he might meet. Headley pulled on to the opposite side but Jones crashed into him. Jones' condition later in the day showed that he should not have been in charge of a cab. A letter had been written to Clarke asking for compensation, .but the defendant had replied that he had witnesses to prove that Jones was on the correct side of the road, and that he was not driving recklessly. Herbert Headlerjr, plaintiff, stated that he had observed Jones previous to the accident, and Jones appeared to have had ""more than he could carry." When plaintiff met Jonris in Princess street at the time of the collision he (plaintiff) had two ladies in the cab. He swerved because he thought, that Jones wa6 going so fastthat he (Jones) could not pull out in time to avert a collision. He nut Jones at the station later in the evening, and Jones used obscene language to^ him in the pTeeen.ee of ladies. The front axle of his cab was brok&n by the impact, three spokes were broken and other damage ■was done. The axle had been temporarily repaired, • but it would take five days to thoroughly repair the cab. Three pounds would be a fair estimate of the loss in fares during th^ee five days. Mr Cajplen : You said, when you were in i Court' a short time ago, that you were only earning about 30s a week with, the cab. [ Plaintiff said that business bad increased ' considerably since that time. Things weie very slack when he had given an estimate t>f hie earnings ac 30s. T. Syme, who was walking to the station to catch the 5.32 train, deposed that he heard a crash and. looking around saw that the two cabs had collided. They were then both on the right-hand side of the road. Hilton Renimant, who was going to the station with the previous witness, said that Headley was on the correct side and Jone6 was not. Jones was galloping and though Headley tried ,to pull on to the other side Jones crashed into him.

Vernon Remnant gave evidence as to Jones' condition during the day". G. W. Remnant deposed that he saw Jones cantering his horses through High street and also saw him drive right on to the footpath up to the doorstep of the Commercial Hotel. Jones appeared to be intoxicated.

Mr Caplen (for the defence) said that the case for the defence would be to prove Jones wa6 driving on hifi proper side of the road and was not intoxicated.

Alfred Clarke (defendant) stated that when Jones returned to the stable that night he was sober enough to work. Jones was a good worker and had only been intoxicated three times since he started in witness' tanploy in June last. Headley went to see witness the night of the accident, and admitted that lie was running on his wrong side of the road. To Mr Barton : Had threatened to take out a prohibition order against Jonts. This was during the last week. Mr Barton: You say that he had only been drunk twice prior to the accident and yet you threaten to prohibit him. You are very particular all of a sudden. Defendant : I Have need to be.

Upon being further cross-examined by Mr Barton defendant said he could not be certain what time Jones returned to the stable.

John Jones (defendant's cab-driver) 6wore that he was driving in tHe middle of the road when he first saw Headley

coming towards him and pulled off- to the left. Headley seemed to pull out to mtet him. Witness could not have avoided the accident, and was not galloping. The horses being of different paces, one was cantering and the other trotting, but both were well in hand. Was sober, having only had three medium shandies during the day. Messrs Purser and Clements were hi the cab and Mx Shaw was on the front.

To Mr Barton: Was not galloping up High street that day, and did Hot get on to the footpath at the Commercial Hotel. Did 'not abuse Headley at the station afterwards. Jones wa6 examined at great length as to times and fares and his whereabouts, but the questions were met with "I don't remember" or

"I will not swear to that." Jones denied that he got Shaw to drive his cab on one occasion during the day bncauee of being too drunk to do it himself. He 6aid Shaw drove the cab while witness went to see somebody. Frederick Shaw corroborated Jones' evidence.

(Left sitting.)