LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVII, Issue 8318, 26 July 1890, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

R.M. COURT.—Fridat. [Before Dr. Giles, R.M.] Judgment Summonses. —The following judgment summonses were dealt with :— Jno. R. Reed v. Lio Medo : Claim, £25 12s. An order was made by consent that the defendant pay £1 in four weeks, and £1 in four weeks thereafter, with leave to apply for a further order as to the balance. John Marshall v. George Clarke: Claim, £4 3s 6d. Defendant did not appear. An order was made for the payment of the sum claimed in 14 days, defendant to undergo, m default, one month's imprisonment. B. C. Beale v. M. Lunny : Claim, £3 4s 6d. In this case no order was made. E. and E. Christie v. J. Jury : Claim, £8 8s 6d. This case was also dismissed. Seegner and Langgubh v. J. Smith : Claim, £17s 11s. An order was made that defendant pay £5 in a week, and the remainder of the debt by instalments of £5 a month. R. Walker v. Alfred Greenway.— Claim, £16 10s. Mr. Theo. Cooper appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Brassey for the defendant. This was an action to recover a sum of money duo for cab hire. The plaintiff, a cab-driver, deposed to having driven Greenway to various parts of the city and to certain houses, the latter having hired witness' cab on several occasions, during the night as well as the day. Two women named Stewart and Moran gave evidence. Tho former deposed that she went with another woman, Wilson, to a race meeting at Potter's Paddock in Walker's cab, which had been hired by Greenway, and the evidence of Moran showed tliat she and threo other women had driven out in Walker's cab, which had again been hired by Green - way. They went to Ellerslie, Panmure, and Mangere. Mr. Brassey did not call the defendant, who was absent. His Worship gave judgment for the plaintiff for the amount claimed, with costs £4 6s. J. Eaoan v. Alfred Gkkkxway.—Claim, £6. This was an action for a sum due for cab hire, and for money lent. Mr. Theo. Cooper appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Brassey for the defendant. The evidence was somewhat similar to that in the previous case. His Worship disallowed the claim for money lent (as ifc was not mentioned in the bill of particulars), and gave judgment for the plaintiff for £4 10s, and costs. W. A. Thomson - v. the Union" Fire and Marine Insurance Company.—Claim, £13 0s 7d. Mr. J&ckson Palmer appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. S. Heskcth for the defendant. In opening the case, Mr. Palmer said the plaintiff was an insurance manager and expert, and the defendants were insurers carrying on business in Auckland as well as in other places. The plaintiff had advised the company to enter into a new branch of business—the insuring of I hay arid straw stacks. After some consideration they decided to do so, and agreed with Mr. Thomson to give him Mi per cent, commission, whilst ■ho was to consider and approve of all the risks taken—in fact, the matter was left to him, and he was to employ whom lie pleased, subject to tho approval of the company. He employed a man named McGee, and subsequently another named Harris. The latter was virtually the defendant in this ca*e. Mr. Thomson agreed to give Mr. Harris 5 per cent, and to receive and approve of the proposals lio took before they went to the company. Harris afterwards complained that 5 per cunt, whs too small a remuneration, and when Thomson laid the matter before the company, they resolved to allow Harris 10s per week extra. After this arrangement had been made, certain work was done, in regard to which the sum of £13 0s 7d was due to Thomson ; but the company then took up the position of maintaining that they and not Thomson had employed Harris, and that, whilst they would pay the plaintiff 10 per cent, upon the work he had done, they would themselves pay Harris 10 per cent, for his work. They had therefore paid £6 odd in Court, alleging that the balance was to be given to Harris. Accordingly the real question in the case was whether Harris had been employed by Thomson or by the company. The plaintiff, P. Thomson, B. Kent (manager of the defendant company), and A. E. Harris gave evidence, and the case wae then adjourned until Monday.

POLICE COURT.-Friday. [Before Colonsl Haultain and Mr. Gilrnour, J.P's.] Drunkknnkss.— Ono man, a first offender, was fined os and costs, or 24 hours hard labour. Mury Ann Bradfield was also fined 5s and. costs, or in default '24 hours.

Unattended VamcLKs.— Joseph Johnstone was charged with leaving his cab unattended in front of the British Hotel, on the 9th July last. Mr. Madden appeared for the defendant, and pleaded not guilty. Constable McCoy gave evidence Oβ to finding the vehicle unattended. The defence was that although the defendant was not actually in attendance on the horses, yet he was standing afc the hotel door watching them. He was only at the bar about half a minute. The Bench said they would impose a fine of Is. John Peach was charged with leaving his cart standing in the street without having the chain on the wheel. Fined Is and costs.

Riding ox Footpath.—Walter Wood was charged with riding a horse on a public footpath. He did not appear, but the case was heard in hie absence. Mr. Bird, member of the One-tree Hill Highway Board, deposed that he saw the accused committing the oftence, and he spoke to him about it. This offence was becoming un intolerable nuisance. Fined 5s and costs.

NON-ATTKNDANCE AT SCHOOL.—William Hamilton was charged with failing to send his child, James Hamilton, to school, such child being being between the ages of 7 and 13 years. Mr. Small, Truant Inspector, gave evidence as to the child being continually on the streets. The Bonch ordered that the child be sent to school, and that the accused should pay the costs of the case, 9s. John Kenny was also ordered to send his child to a public school, and to piy 9s costs.