LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXII, Issue 7258, 21 February 1885, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

POLICE COURT.-Friday.

JJ.M. COURT.-FenUT." * [Before H. Q. deth Smith, E*q.„ B.M.] C. Bakkb v. G. B. Maceak. — Claim, £20, value of a horse gored to death by a> bull. Mr. 8. Heaketh for plaintiff; Mr. Tfaeo. Cooper for defendant. The evidence was taken on the previous day. His-Worship nonsuited plain tiff, on the ground that there was no evidence of acienter ;■ that is, of knowledge on the.part of, defendant that b's bull was a dangerous tine. His Worship went minutely into the evidence given, and intimated that he did not think it showed a knowledge on the part of defendant of any vice in the bull. And as to another point raised by the plaintiff, namely, that an offer had been made by Macrae in settlement of plaintiffs claim, and that that might be assumed as evidence of scienter, he thought the case noted showed that although it was evidence, yet it was of so light a character that be did not feel justified in acting upon it. In the case cited by the plaintiff, the Judges there certainly held that such evidence could go before the jury, but also intimated that it was but very slight evidence of knowledge on the part of defendant. Plaintiff was therefore nonsuited with costs, £4 7s. Mr. Hesketh asked His Worship to express an Opinion upon the point raised by the defence, viz., that contributory negligence had been shown by plaintiff in getting between his heifer and the bull to drive the beifer away. His Worship replied that having decided against plaintiff on the question of scienter, he had not gone into the other point raieed. Subsequently, however, His Worship expressed an opinion that the plaintiff oould not in any sense have been guilty of negligence, but in driving the beifer away had only done what he was quite justified in doing. , J. K |Ranobrs6n v. St. J. Kkyes.—Claim £12 2s 6d. This case was adjourned to next Court day. Sharp and Co. v. St. J., Kbyes.— Claim £7 Ha, for goods delivered. Mr. 8. Hesketh appeared for plaintiff; Mr. E. Cooper for defendant. The dispute was as to the price agreed upon for a quantity of oats—plaintiff stating that the price mentioned was 3s 3d, and defendant maintained that the figure was 2s 10d. It was shown that 3s 3d w.is the ruling market price of Canadian oats at the time. Judgment was given for plaintiff. Hall ahd Hall v. B. R. Tooth.— Claim £2, for 'services rendered 'as nurse. Mr. B. Cooper for plaintiff; Mr. Theo. Cooper for defendant. After hearing the evidence plaintiff was nonsuited.

[Before His Worship the Mayor, Mr. W. R. Waddel J.P.I Drunkenness.—Mary Ann Mooney, who was suffering from delirium tremens, was remanded to 26th inet, for medical treatment. No Visible Means .or Support—Sarah Quinn was oharged with having no visible means of support at Auckland, on February 19. The accused pleaded not guilty. Dβ teotive Hughes and Sergeant Kiely gave evidence as to the accused's character, and she was remanded to Saturday, to afford her an opportunity to leave the city for a situation which she said was offered to her at Whangarei. Elba Thornley, a companion of the girl Quinn, was also oharged with a like offence, on February 19. The accused pleaded not guilty. , Sergeant Kiely was examined, and deposed that the girl. had been in the company of the girl Quinn for the last fortnight Her parents resided at Parnell. His Worship discharged the accused on her promising to return to her parents. ; , . . r . [Before Messrs. F. L. Prime and (J. von derHeyde, J.P's.J' The Mangere Macrae was charged with a breaoh of the Impounding Act by allowing a bull above he age of nine months to wander on land at Mangere not being in his occupation on February 2. Mr. Hudson Williamson appeared for the prosecution on behalf of the Mangere Road Board, and Mr. Theo. Cooper represented' the defendant and pleaded guilty, and urged (or mitigation of penalty. The defendant was the owner of the bull. ' He had been hitherto careful in keeping his fenees in repair, but bow they were damaged he was ' not prepared, to say. Miss Macrae had endeavoured to get the bull back to the paddock again, but it had wandered off to the Mangere run. The maximum penalty was £20, and he thought a nominal penalty would meet the case. The defendant had paid the fees, &'c, for the impounding of the animal. Mr. Williamson replied, and stated that he was instructed by the Road Board to push for a penalty which would debar the defendant from permitting the animal to be at large on the Mangere run, which it had been allowed to use for at least 18 months. The section of # the Act under which the information was laid was tor the purpose of preventing entire animals to wander at large. In giving judgment the Bench said that defendant had pleaded guilty to allowing the animal to be at large on the run, and wae fully aware that they -•<mld fine up to £20. They would impose such a fine as they hoped would be a preventive in future. Fined £5 and oosts, £3 19s, amounting to £8 19s in a11,,,A second information, for allowing the same bull to be at large on the Mangere-road, was withdrawn upon the application of Mr. Williamson. Prohibition Okder. —An order prohibiting the supply of liquor to Charles Kmorson Knapp, clerk and accountant, Rβtnuera, during the ensuing twelve months, was granted upon the application of Mrs. Kliza Enapp, who deposed that her husband had been frequenting the hotels in Newmarket since Boxing Day, and misspent and wasted his means oh driuk. William Dinnisnn, Newmarket, also gave evidence as to defendant's intemperate habits.