TE KUITI S.M. COURT.

King Country Chronicle, Volume III, Issue 107, 12 November 1908, Page 2

TE KUITI S.M. COURT.

Wednesday, November 11th, 1908,

Before Mr E. C. Cutten, S.M,

Advertising a Lottery. William McColl was charged with causing to be published an advertisement in connection with Tattersall's Sweep, Tasmania, in the King Country Chronicle, contrary to Section 3 of the Gaming and Lotteries Act, 1881, Amendment Act, 1885. Defendant pleaded guilty and was fined £5, and costs 235. E. Walter, for whom Mr Hine appeared, pleaded guilty to a charge of objectionable behaviour while under the influence of liquor, and was fined 40s and costs £2 3s 6d. A similar charge against J. O'Brien, who pleaded not guilty was dismissed. W. Standish was charged with causing a beast to be [worried by dogs at Te Kuiti on October Bth. Constable Mathew stated on the day in question on the Mangaoriro Road, a steer broke away from a mob of cattle and defendant put his dogs on it. Witness and Mr Hattaway was standing in front of Hattaway's Stables, and as the beast looked dangerous they got out of the way. Witness told defendant to take off his dogs, and defendant replied that he would when he was fininshed. The beast jumped into Hattaway's paddock; the dogs were still after it, and broke out again by breaking two wires. He considered the beast was made wild by being dogged. Cross-examined by Mr Broadfoot: Witness knew defendant well. He was said to be a good drover. Witness had no personal experience in driving stock. He would not put dogs on a beast. He would try to head it. Knew the practice in this district was to dog the cattle. Didn't know if defendant's dogs were given to biting, lie saw defendant gallop after the beast. V. S. Hattaway gave similar evidence as to the occurrence. He could not say what was the proper ! method of treating a beast that broke I away. Knew more about horses. WilJ liam Standish, defendant, admitted the tacts, but stated he was taking the best means to bring the beast back. It was a well known fact that a beast was less dangerous to the public when | being dogged than when being chased j on horseback. Cross-examined by Con- | stable Mathew, witness said the beast might have been headed without dogs. ! If he was driving a mob a hundred miles he- would certainly dog every beast tiiat broke away, otherwise he would never get. them to the end of the iourney. A. D. McCardle gave expert evidence as to the proper method to head a beast that broke away. He considered defendant a first-class drover who had followed, the proper custom. If beasts thai broke away had to be headed on horseback a drover would require to have a lot of spare horses. To Constable Mathew: A tame beast could be made wild by dogging. To His Worship: In (lie township a beast that broke ;nvay ::n<l was dogged would be . dangerous. It would be the duty of the drover te ride ahead of the beast. Similar expert evidence was given by Henry John Musson who said a beast | was dangerous directly it. broke away I from tiie mob. If dogs were put on the beast it was not likely to charge anyone, and was. less dangerous than if ieft alone. He would have followed the same eoui>o as defendant had. C. B. Cornish and .'ohn O'Brien gave export evidence in a similar strain. His Worship : add in view of the evidence, the case must bo dismissed, but he would like to say that.il' there was only the one way to dead with cattle which broke away, it was highly dangerous for cattle to be driven through the townhship. It. Hetet was charged with failing to remove offensive matter from prom isos owned, by him and occupied by G. Taylor at To Kuiti. The complaint was made In the Health Inspector, My Bennett, siated that notice had been given io belli owner an<| tynantj

and had tried to git the fplace cleaned up without resorting to law, but neither tenant nor owner had taken notice of the demand. Defendant pleaded guilty and explained that he had requested his tenant'to clean up the place, and it had since been attended to. His Worship inflicted a fine of 40s, and costs £2 3s 6d.

Judgment went by default in the fol- - lowing cases: —Green and Colebrook v. J. J. McCarthy, £2 9s 6d and costs 10s; Hegglin v. Malone, £8 10s and costs £2 15s 6d; Green and Colebrook v. J* Ball, £l2 14s and costs £1 10b 6d. Judgment Summonses: Green and Colebrook v. Kati te Kaukau.—Order for payment 'orthwith, or in default 14 days imprisonment. Hattaway V. Wallace. —Mr Hine appeared for the judgment creditor, and Mr Broadfoot for the judgment debtor. Debtor was examined by Mr Hine as to his ability to pay, and stated he had been work* ing for a man since September last, and had received no money. His em* ploycr was waiting for money from the Advances to Settlers Office. The caie was adjourned by the Court until next Court day, December 9th. Gibson v. D. Meredith.—£7 19s lOd. Order for payment forthwith or 7 days imprisonment. Scott v. Hetet.—Claim £54,f6r contract work done. This case had been adjourned to enable plaintiff to produce evidence as to letters written to defendant. After hearing the evidence of C. Taylor, His Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for £54, and costs £B'[2s 2d. Rogers v. Young and McCardle. —Claim £lO the amount of a deposit paid by plaintiff to defendant Young for purchase of sections on the Awakino Road at Te Kutji, and which purchase was not completed. Mr Sharpies appeared for plaintiff and Mr Broadfoot for defendants. Plaintiff stated in evidence he had agreed to purchase three sections through Mr Young for £SO, and had paid £lO as a deposit. The property had never been transferred to him. He had been asked to sign an application for two of the sections to have them granted to him by the Maori Land Board but had refused. Cross-examined by Mr Broad* foot, witness said the area of the property was to be 3 acres. Mr Young had not told him previously that there was a mistake and that there were only two sections. The agreement produced had been signed by witness. In that agreement three sections were referred to. He had subsequenlty placed the sections in Mr Youngs' hands, for sale. He would have been content ot take back his £lO deposit and settle the matter as he was leaving Te Kutii. V. A. McCardle, one of the defendants, stated he put certain sections in Mr Young's hands for sale. He had no direct title but had a right to the sections, and could have obtained a lease in his own name, but thinking he might sell, he had not done so, as it would be easier for a purchaser to get the lease direct in his own name. The only sections he had a right over were 16 and 17. He had. not received the £lO. He had lost the sections as another man had stepped in and acquired a lease of them. James Burns Young, one of the defendants said sections 16, 17, and 18, were placed in his hands for sale. He sold them to plaintiff and drew up the agreement produced. "His duty was done when the sale was effected. He thought all along that plaintiff had got things fixed up, and only knew to the contrary, when he heard another man had secured the sections. He waR to get £4O for the sections and all over that amount was to be his. He had sold to plaintiff for £SO and the £lO deposit was his. Mr Broadfoot, for defendants, aßked for judgment on the grounds of equity and good conscience. Mr Sharpies for plaintiff, contended that it was the duty of a vendor to make a title, and the agreement signed by plaintiff could not be carried out. An agreement for the sale of land, required to be in writing, and if there was any alteration of the agreement in question, it should have been in writing also. His Worship -held that must be for plaintiff against both defendants. The defendant Young claimed he had an interest oin the deal and had received the deposit and'held it. Claim and Counter-Claim: J. N. McFadyen v. A. Aldred, claim £B9 2s, wages for work done by plaintiffs for defendant. Aldred counter claimed for various amounts for tools and non-com-pletion of jol?. Judgment was given for the claim of £39 2s, with costs £5 ss, and for counter claim for £6 10s and costs £1 6s. Mr Broadfoot appeared for plaintiff and Mr Sharpies for defendant. Workmen's Wages: —Three men, Clement Kean, William Downey, and Frank Kiltie, claimed wages from Brown and Johanßen who had a subcontract from A. Aldred in Mr McCardle's bush. Mr Franklin appeared for Plaintiffs and Mr Howarth for defendants. It whs proved that defendants were sub-con tractoro, and plain! tiffs had|worked for them. [Mr Franklin ) stated he had served a notice on Mr McCardle attaching monies due under the contract.—Judgment was given in the case of Kean for £5 13s 9d and costs £2 7s; Downey for £7 18s 6d and costs £2 7s; and Kiltie for £6 6s 2d and costs £2 7s. Beck and Co. v. A. Barnett. Claim £42 for balance of bush felled over and above quantity computed and paid for by defendant.—Mr Hine appeared for plaintiff and Mr Broadfoot for defendant. After hearing evidence His Worship said he had reluctantly come to the conclusion that he would have to non-suit the plaintiff. The evidence of defendant was moßt unsatisfactory, and he would have been glad had it been possible for his decision to go another way. Plaintiff had signed a receipt as a full and final payment for the bush falling, still he would have had no hesitation in going behind a receipt which was not quite what it purported to be, seeing that further money had been paid subsequently. However, another of the partners had signed the same receipt as a full and final payment, and there had been no evidence produced to show that Ira did not regard it as such. Plaintiffs coul«> bring another action or not at they thought fit. He thought a compromise might be affected with advantage to both sides. Defendant would hot be allowed costs, but defendant'* solicitor would receive £2 6s 6d. Keighley Bros. v. H. Fejdt.— Ojqiiq £2 lis for gracing hordes qt After hearing the evidence'qf tyotih para ties, judgment was given fQV Ufa. amount claimed, with posts 1?*,