LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXI, Issue 6965, 14 March 1884, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

R.M. COURT.—Thubsdat. [Before H. G. Seth Smith, Kjq . B.M.] The weekly sitting of the Court was held this morning, and the following business disposed of :— Undbfen'ded Ca=es(Judgment for Plain-tiff:*).—-W. Percival v. John Gifford, £25; costs, £4 17s. J. A. Tole v. Maurice Power, £6 10s ; costs, £1 3s 6d. George Boyd v. Francis Greenwood, £1 13s 9d ; costs, £1 IS-i 6d. Hancock v. P. Conneil, £7 12s ; costs, £1 18s. J. C. Sharlaud v. D. Cooper, £3 7s; costs, £1 3s 6d. Cruicksbank and Millar v. T, P. Eraser, £15 4s lOd; costs, £2 16s; J. B. Ularkson v. 'Alfred Weaver, £1 Ss ; costs, 12s. 'T. Henderson v. P. McGee, £5; rosts, £1 8s 6d. Alfred Tyer v. Davis, £8 Is 6d ; costs, Ids. Joseph and Catherine Keatg v. Hugh Sullivan, £2 9a ; costs, £1 7s 6d. Jlt> ghekt Debts.—Thomas Goodacre v. Charles Hose, £6 lis 6d ; thedefendant was ordered to pay by instalments of os per fortnight, or seven days in default. John Leek v. Robert Brewin, £3 los 6d ; ordered to pay the amount within a month. James Howard v. John Keir, £2-1 13s ; the defendant consented to an order to pay by instalments of 20s per week, or 21 davs in default. H. Maxfield v. John Watson, £4 us 7d ; the defendant did not appear, and was ordered to pay within a month, or seven days in default. Lewis Moses v. J. A. Jauger, £7 4s; the defendant was ordered to pay 20s per week, or seven days' imprisonment. W. Speskman v. R. Best, £2 15s ; ordered to pey 53 per week, or five days' imprisonment.

Daniel McLen.van v. Witliam Garrick. —Claim £24 16s. Mr. Hall for the plaintiff, Mr. Tole for the defending The plaintiff had recovered a judgment against the defendant for breach of contract to sell certain premises for £20. On that occasion the defendant swore that plaintiff had not paid (.he deposit in time, that he (defendant) could get twice the money for the lease, and that it would be worth £50 to a business man. The defendant had just rented the Young Women's Institute for the purpose of establishing a lodging house, and filled it with furniture obtained on borrowed money. The bailiffs were put into the house, and the furniture seized and sold. The defendant now swore that he had no means of paying. It was contended the bailiffs were withdrawn, that there was a surplus over the fcatisfaction of the security, that the prisoner was carrying on a profitable business as a boarding-house keeper. The judgment debtor was examined at great length. He now said be did sell the premises for £20. He had previously sworn he would not sell for double the amount, and that he did not sell. Mr Arthur, auctioneer, said the goods in the Young Women's Institute building realised £107. The defendant was ordered to pay £24 16s within two months, or in default, one month's imprisonment.

Graham v. Plomridge. — CJaim : £13 14a Bd. Mr. Cotter for plaintiff; Mr. Theo. Cooper for defendant. This was a claim for money paid to defendant (£1 3s) to be paid to Mr. Boyd, and rent of a house in Victoria-street (£2j ss) at £1 a week (total, £26 8s), less £12 13* 4d, proceeds of sale of defendant's goods under a distress warrant. There was a set off in which the defendant charged 7s 6d a week for a room in which the plaintiff had stored goods upon his departure for England. The question of the right to put in a set-off after an adjournment of the hearing of a cause was raised by Mr. Cotter. The facts were that this cause was appointed to be heard on Thursday, but was, on the defendant's application, adjourned until to-day. On Monday last the set-off was put in by defendant, and Mr. Cotter, for plaintiff, now objected that notice of auch setoff ought to have been given twenty-four hours before last Thursday. Mr. Cooper replied, contending that the day of hearing wa9 the " day appointed for hearing" mentioned in the R.M. Act, 1567. His Worship ruled in Mr. Cotter's favour, remarking that a distinction existed between cases in which thu Court adjourned a cause and where the parties or ono of them obtained a judgment. The plaintiff and his agent deposed to the contract for use and occupation by defendant. His Worship considered the set-off of the most hazy description, and gave judgment for the amount claimed and costs, £2 10s 6d. Lhydon v. Waters.—This was a claim for £3, value of an incubator. Mr. E. Cooper appeared for the plaintiff;, Mr. S. Hesketh for the defence. The plaintiffs are auctioneers, and the defendant a well-known restaurant-keeper and confectioner. The incubator had been placed for sale with plaintiffs by a man named Harding, who described it as being in good working order. The defence was that it was incomplete, and not in workiug order, as it had been guaranteed. Judgment was given for the amount claimed and costs, £1 2s 6d.

POLICE COURT.—Thursday. [Before Messrs. F. L. Prime, and H. BoardinaD, J.P.'a] Drunkkksess.—Four persona were punished for being drunk. John Backland, suffering from delirium tremens, was remanded for a week. Larceny as a Bailee.—John McMillan was charged with larceny, as a bailes, of a book, " The Life of St. Patrick," value 50s, tho property of Ann McKerrall. Mr. Napier appeared for the defonce. Sergeant Gamble asked for a remand till Friday, 21ss inst., which was granted. Prisoner was admitted to bail in his own recognisances of £10, and two sureties of £5 each. Ashaolt.—Abraham Bowden was charged with assaulting W. T. Davis, by seizing him by the throat and striking him on the face. Defendant pleaded not guilty. Mr. Napier appeared for the prosecution. The prosecutor, a clerk, deposed that on Tuesday, the 1 lth, when walking up Queen-street, he heard a voice calling him. He said he had no time then. Bowden went after him, caught him by the throat, and struck him twice in the face. He accused witness of calling him a loafer, and' this he denied, and he struck him again. At a later period of the day he repeated the assault. .Edwin Baker, employed at Porter and Co.'s, who witnessed the first assault, gave corroborative evidence. Charles Johnson yave similar evidence. For the defence Edward Rogers, a cab-driver, deposed that defendant only shoved.the prosecutor, and be did not see him take him by the throat or strike him. Alfred Tucker and William Price; cabdrivers. gave oimilar evidence. The litter only witnessed the. second occurrence. He. said, that Davis struck Bowden first, when Bowden tapped him on tho shoulder to call his attention, and Bowden then struck nim back. The defendent also gave his own version of tho case.— Tho Court found the defendant guilty of the assault, and impoßcd a fine of 40s and-costs, or 14 days' imprisonment, and also ordered him to be bound over to keep the peace for three months iD his own bonds of £50, and two sureties of £25 each.