RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume II, Issue 18, 24 October 1879, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

*__ FOXTON.

Wednesday, October 22, 1879. (Before It. Ward, Esq.. R.M., and E. S. Thynne, Esq., J.P.) WANDERING HORSES. Christian Hono^e was charged with allowing a horse to wander at large in the Foxton streets on Ootober 9. Defendant admitted the offence, and was fined Is and costs, 7s. HREACII QV CONBTAHULAUY ORDINANCE. John Cox was charged with the above offence, by drawing a sledge throngh the' streets of Fox con, not being upon a wheeled carriage. Defendant; did not appear. Constable M'Annlty deposed to having^ witnessed the offence, and called (Jhristianl Honore to confirm his evidence. Fined Is and costs, 7b. Constable M'Annlty asked for expenses for Mr Honore. . ; His Worship said as .the witness had just had a case of his own, he had puffered no loss through attending, and he should decline to allow expe'nses. (Laughter.) CRUELTY TO ANIMALS. Charles Close and Thomas Sevan, jun. f a half-caste, youth, were charged with having cruelly itltreated a bullock. Mr John Kebbell came forward and said the case was really against him, as the owner of the bullock in question. He therefore asked that the case might be withdrawn against the men, and the summons served upon him. The Bench said they could not interfere with the constable in his case. Constable M'Anulty said he could not recognise Mr Kebbell in ♦'lie matter. He asked leave to add to the information the words, "by working it while in an unfit condition." The information was amended as requested. Mr Kebbell asked if he would be allowed to watch the case for defendants, as the whole expense would fall upon him. His Worship declined the permission unless Mr Kebbell was a solicitor of tho Supreme Court. He added Mr Kebbell's action was quite irregular. Mr Maclean was thereupon engaged for the defenee. John Frederick Rockstrow deposed — I am a surgeon residing at Foxton ; I saw defendants on October 10, near the Foxton railway station ; my attention was called to certain bullocks, and I spoke to defendants, who told me they were in charge of the team ; my attention was called to certain oxen in the team, from the peculiar noise one made ; I looked around, and saw black matter running from the natural outlet of ono of the oxen ; the others were mere skeletons ; the one the matter was running from was one of the pole bullockB ; I saw the youth standing near the bullnnks ; it was a nasty, horrible sight ; the beas-t made a noise like' the suctioa of a pump, after which the black matter flowed, each time to the extent of from half a pint to a pint; it was a blaok, slimy substunoe; it could not have been from feeding on new grass ; it must have resulted from a disease of some days' standing ; the men were very saucy to me ; when I said to them it was a shame to bring oxen like that into town, Bevan said the bullocks were lean beoause they never got time to have a feed. Cross-examined by Mr Muolean — The outflow was mostly blood ; I noticed it was slimy, but do not know whether it was mucus or pus ; of my professional knowledge I am not aware of the injuries the bullock might have sustained ; I know nothing of the bringing up and training of bullocks ; one of the bullocks was black— I think it was one of the polers ; the blaok one was on the off side j I do not know wnether, if the bullock was strained when breakiujr.in, it would suffer with an out flow fluoh as I saw ; I think the bullock, if it had had a voice in the matter, would have objected to being put to work. <H"r Maclean thought all bullocks, if they could, would object to being worked. Constable M'Anulty deposed to having found a red and white oow in the condition described by. previous witness; he asked why defendants brought a beast into town in that state, and Close said they tried to take him out before coming into town, but could not do so; he considered it was cruelty to have auoh it beast in the team j the beast was offensive j that wea why witness asked the reason of their bringing the animal into town ; witness knew nothing of bullocks; when he first saw defendant* the team were standing near tho station ; thenpise the animal made indicated grqat pain ; the other beasts were not in distress, bnt were very poor. ' This conoluded the case for the prosecution. Mr Maclean, for the defence* ealled— John Kebbell, a farmer residing at Ohau, who deposed— l know the team in question, as they are mine ; I know the red and white bullock ; that bullock and some others were broken in last fail for me by Air M' Donald ; having been broken in then, the animals are poor, and have not had time to get up in condition ; the bullock in question suffers from an internal strain, received either while being broken in or afterwards ; it is a common thing for auoh strains to be re* coived by bullooks ; it affects the bullock in the form of feces whilst the stomaoh is | full, and afterwards as wind ; I ounnot say whether it causes much pain; when the bullock came here it,had been fed on green food, bnt on the following day it had dry food, and on reaching the homestead was perfectly right ; I knew that having green footr might cause wind on the stomach'; my houee is 17 miles from Foxton ; on the return journey the bullooks took home between 7UO and 800 feet of timber ; the up load consisted of SO sheepskins, 3 boxes tallow, and 2 bundles of hay, fodder for the team ; they are always fed daring winter on hay, and have the same food when driven into Foxton ; Mr M'Donald, who trained

the bullocks, thought the strain was caused by overrunning when young ) I have been for 20 years a farmer, and never had such a oharge laid against me before. The Bench dismissed the information, at the same time expressing its opinion that the constable had fulfilled his duty in bring* ing the case before the court. THE PAIAKA SAWMILL. W. J . and F. Loudon v. J. A. Perreau.— Claim £31 9s Id for good* supplied to defendant as one of the firm of ftobinson & Co. MrStaitefor plaintiff, Mr Hawkins for defendant. Mr Staite, in opening his case, remarked that several pereons had en'ered into a contract with Mr M'Beth to cut timber for him, defendant was a sleeping partner, having contributed to the concern consideration upon which he had been admitted to partnership. The goods had-fceen supplied by plaintiff with the knowledge that defendant was a partner. Francis Loudon deposed that he was the sole member of the, firm of.W. J. &JF. Loudon ; he produced the books showing voods supplied, and balance' now due £39 9s Id: the account was reduced by a quantity of timber redeived ; by him ; when Robinson asked him for credit, he told him it was " not quite good enough," but upon being told Perreau .was a partner, he con Rented to let the firm have goods ; that was in May; on July 11 Perreau told witness he would not be responsible for further goods supplied ; he said he was a partner only in the profits, but not in any losses that might accrue. ; he therefore "wrote to the others, and stopped the credit'; Simp son came down at once, and explainedithat he had seen Perreau, and that a written partnership agreement was signed by him, upon hearing which witness gave further credit. „.'.-■ By Rfr Hawkins — I cannot of my own knowledge, swear these ( items i were furnished ; when Perreau came to me he said he supposed I would have gone ' on giving credit if he had not come to me; I said I would 1 ; I see in the account hair pins, children's socks, boots, &c. ; I don't know they would be neceasary to cut timber ; they must .have been supplied to . tbft , firm of Robinson and Co or they would not be so entered ; it was my intention all along to hold all of them responsible ; I received" , timber from them to secure the account ; I 4olJ^patthe minimum price fixed' by them, and' credited the account with the sum I received for it : I have charged them with the f reight. and cartage;. , j"> 'By Mr Staite — After Perreau saw me, Simpson (one of the firm) waited on me, and assured me the partnership still ,exiflte^; mppn the strength qf-that I supplied the goods. James Dawson, a bookkeeper for plaintiff, deposed — Robinson & Co. are indebted to Mr London £39 9s' Id; Simpson haknowlrdges having received the coods ; I heard Peireau say he was a partner in the profits but not ia the losses, and would not be responsible for any further goods supplied ; that was on July (1 : the names of the persons ifithtf partnership were entered in the account shortly after it was opened ; the credit was given on Robinson's request. By Mr Hawkins— The goods were sent by the steamer Osprey ; I do not know if Mrs Robinson ordered any of the things; the whole of the things were forwarded to, the order of Robinson and Co. E. S. Thynne, land agent, produced an agreement made between Messrs. Perreau and others and Mr M'Beth. George Gerald Augustus Simpson deposed that he was a member of the firm of Robinson & Co., or. as it was more generally called Simpson & Co. ; he Was manager of the concern ; the goods were supplied to the firm, for the men, and they received them in lieu of wages. By Mr Hawkins — I did not keep a boarding house ; I had- a store ia which I kept the goods, of which I had charge ; a small extra charge was made to cover freight and trouble ; I have had to con.e down and see after things, and as my time was going on, the goods ware charged sufficiently- to compensate for these losses ; Mr M'Beth did not pay us in money, ibut we took timber instead ; one of the partners kept a boarding house] for a short, time and received goods from the firm the same as the others; the concern never worked under the name of Robinson & Co., but Robinson might have used his name, he being a partner ; after getting Mr Loiidon's letter, I went down and saw him, and told him Perreau, was a partner ; I know of no one else except Mr Loudon, whose account came in as Robinson & Co. Mr Hawkins here produned an agreement made between Perreau and the other partners, in which it wad agreed that Perreau was to share the profits without liability. Uy the Court — The men were debitec with the goods supplied to : them ' by the firm ; Perreau has not retired from the firm ; we ceased to. cut for M'Beth last, week. Mr Hawkins, in opening the case for the defence, quoted authorities to prove that a partner could only bo held liable where the goods supplied were actually necessary to the fulfilment <tf, the contract. He also dwelt; upon the agreement made between the other defendants and. Perreau, by Which the latter was released 1 front all liability. He called ' John Alfred Perreau, the defendant, who denied having acknowledged any responsibility to Mr Loudon ; his agreement was simply to share in the profits.; witness detailed at length the conversation's' he had with Mr Loudon regarding the credit. John Williamson, one of the defendants, was called for tbV'defence, but his evidence was mostly in favour of the plaintiff. - Mr Staite having briefly replied, during which he urged that as no notice had been given to .Mr Loudon of the agreement freeing Mr Perreau from liability, the latter was still responsible, His Worship said he "had come to the conclusion, after carefully weighing the erideu'oe, 'arid hearing 'the' arguments of counsel, that defendant must be considered a partner in the firm. Judgment for amount claimed and costs. Air Hawkins gave notioe of appeal. THE LOCAL HOABD CASE. 'This was the case in which ■Mr John Purcell sued the Chairman of the Foxton Looal Board—Mr A. Gray— for the 1 &m<- bf £8, for loss and damage sustained by him through the "continued negligence of r the Board ' ' in not providing sufficient drainage on No. 1 Line. . . Mr Maolenn, who appeared for the Board, took a preliminary objection to the case being prooeeded with, on the ground that the Looal Board was not responsible for the damage done, as they had no control over watercourses &o , the County Council being the responsible body. He read a number of extraots from the Public Works and Counties Aots in support of his objection, and stated' that until the control of watercourses and drains was delegated to the Board by the County Counoil, Mr PurcdU had no claim on the Board. Mr Puroell said it. was agreed between Mr Gray and himself that no professional assistauoe was to be engaged in this case. He believed Mr Gray; had engaged profes, sional assistance before speaking to him, thereby decoying him into the action. Still he would fight the claim on its merits. The Board had been expending money on the drain in dispute for years, and if the objection was sustained, the Board had bees frittering away the. ratepayers' money dur. '

ing that period. FurtW<%is claim was For insufficient sewage etUiis land, the eulirert being far toe- small \jtoc«py off the water 1 . He had previously^>o°&?plained to the Board, and the evil had been partially remedied. Mr Maclean pointed out that MrPnrc^lTs * remarks would make very good evidence if the case proceeded. In justice to Mr Gray, he would state that he had informed the plaintiff he intended to raise this point. His Worship asked the plaintiff sorre questions as to whether the damage was oaused by a natural Wateraourse or" drain, during which Mr Puroell stated that it wan not a natural watercourse, but an artificial one, and the damage was caused by the culvert on his land being too small. Mr M'Lean said his argument would include tbis also. „ A , . A . , Mr Purcell contended- that -the Local Board had full power in reference to sewage. Kit w*s % watercourse, he would giro in, but he said it was a sewer. By the Court— The drain had been made for the last twelve yearsr Mr Ward said the plaintiff had sued wrongfully. The Local Board was not responsible. If any body was liable, it was the County Council. Plaintiff would be non -suited with costs, 14s. ■ ■■ [ ■ '•' CIVIL CASES. Crowther v. Sedcole— Claim £1 15s Bd. Judgment ex parte for amount 'claimed and costs, ss, ) : . . M'Fadyen v. F. W.. B,uck--Claim £7 10s on a judgment summons. No 1 appearance of defendant. Amount to be paid forthwith, or 2 weeks' imprisonment in Wellington gaol. ' ' ■ :.f - ■>__ ■■'■■I