LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 9628, 28 September 1894, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

SUPREME COURT.IN Banco. Thursday. [Before His Honor Mr. Justice Conolly.]

FARMER AND BROWN V. THE COOK COUNT?

COUNCIL. The arguments on this case, which had occupied His Honor and counsel the greater portion of Wednesday, were resumed at tea o'clock this morning. The motion was that judgment might be entered up in favour of the defendants, or that in the alternative the plaintiffs might be nonsuited. Mr. Theo. Cooper appeared in support of the motion, and Mr. W. L. Rees for the plaintiffs to oppose it. The case it will be recollected was tried in Gisborne in March last, before His Honor and a jury, and the jury found for the plaintiffs assessing the damages at £300. Leave was granted to the defendants to apply to have judgment entered for them, or that the plaintiffs be non-suited, and it is this motion which is now before the Court. Mr. Cooper's address had occupied the whole of the previous afternoon, and he resumed at ten o'clock this morning, concluding at halfpast twelve, contending that in law, even if the jury found for the plaintiffs on all the issues, the defendants were still entitled to judgment. Mr. Rees then opened the argilments for the plaintiffs. He dealt exhaustively with the case itself, and the evidence taken at the hearing at Gisborne, and he then proceeded to quote authorities and to reply to those quoted by Mr. Cooper. He had not concluded when the Court adjourned at five o'clock, and the further hearing of the arguments will be resumed at two o'clock on Friday.

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.-Thursday. [Before Mr. H. W. Northcroft, S.M.] Undefended Cases. —In the following undefended cases judgment was given for the plaintiff, with costs: —Walter_ Dawson v. Louis Grey Magill, claim £2 Bs, judgment was given for £1 Bs, costs 7s; A. J. Entrican v. Hector McQuarrie, claim £36 13s sd, costs £3 Is; Paterson and Co. v. Charles McCormick,jun., claim £10 3s 7d, costs £2 _6d; Stone Bros, and Co. v, Charles McCormick, jun., claim £11 Is, costs £2 5s 6d; Arthur Cleave v. John Bertie, claim £1 16s Bd, costs 6s; J agger and Parker v. Charles White, claim Jt'B 4s 7d, judgment was given for £4 4s 7d, costs £1 5s 6d ; James Rae v. Thomas J. B. Smith, claim £2 4s, costs 4s; Harry Madfield v. Francis Hay Chapman, claim £5, costs 6s; John Piatt v. Cecil Ball, claim £2 9s, costs lis; George Johnston v. William Henry Fenton, claim £2 Is Bd, costs lis; John Peter Hooton v. William Henry Fenton, claim £17 lis 4d, costs £1 15s 6d; John Young v. Robert Mitchell, claim 9s lid, costs 6s ; Charles Spencer v. Morton Cowie, claim £2 lis, judgment was given for £2 7s 6d, costs lis; Richard Laishley v. Margaret Beith, claim £1 Is, costs 6s; William S. Jones v. George Andrews, claim £2 7s Bd, costs 7s ; Matthew Shaw Lawrie v. Edward Lawrence, claim £1 2s Bd, costs 6s; Alfred Kidd, Ralph Thomas Michaels, and George Peace v. John Brown, claim £54, costs £4 7s ; Robert Russell v. John Wilson, claim 5s 3d, costs 6s. Joseph Barber v. Cooke and Swain (late Cooke ani> Cooke).— £2 12s. Mr. Burton appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. F. Baume (instructed by Mr. Gittos) for the defendants. After hearing the evidence His Worship non-suited the plaintiff with cots £1 Is. James Hunter v. Fredk. Calgher.— Claim, £22 7s, for board and lodging. The plaintiff, who is an hotelkeeper, at Parnell, sued the defendant for the above sum, for board and lodging, money lent, and refreshments supplied. Mr. Gittos appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Baume, instructed by Mr. T. F. Weston, of New Plymouth, for the defendant. Mr. Baume took exception to the claim for refreshments and money lent, on the ground that the items were not full and explicit, as required by the Act. The dates were not given when the refreshments were supplied. His Worship upheld the objection, and the sum of £6 12s was struck out. After hearing the evidence, Mr. Northcroft gave judgment for the plaintiff for the sum of £15 15s, and costs £4 9s.

POLICE COURT.— 1

[Before Mr. R. S. Bush, S.M.]

Drunkenness. — Hinch, for a second offence of drunkenness within six months, was fined 10s, with the alternative of 48 hours' imprisonment. Julia Fletcher, for a similar offence, was remanded for medical examination. Disobeying Orders.— seaman named Charles Quinn was charged with having on the 21st September, 1891, on board the Waimate, Iving in the port of Auckland, been guilty of wilful disobedience to lawful commands. The accused admitted having been guilty of bad behaviour. The captain ] of the vessel said that previous to arrival in port, the accused's conduct was very good. His Worship sentenced the man to 48 hours' imprisonment, and also ordered him to forfeit two days' pay. Alleged Assault and Robbery. — A middle-aged man named George Lawson appeared to answer a charge of having on the 26th September, assaulted one William Roberts, and robbed him of the sum of 18s in silver. Inspector Hickson, who appeared for the prosecution, asked for a remand until next Monday, which was granted. Bail was allowed the accused, in two sureties of £20. Raid on Disorderly Houses. — Jane Whelan was charged that on the 20th September, at Auckland, she kept a common bawdy house, situate in Chapel-street. Inspector Hickson conducted the prosecution. Evidence was given by Sergeant Lyons and Constable Howell _as to their having visited the house in question on the night of the 20th September. They found three men and a boy there. The house was occupied by prostitutes. Acting-Detective Bailey deposed that he had known the accused for two years. She was a prostitute by repute. William John Calvert, who described himself as a cabman, said he was acquainted with the defendant. She had occupied her present house for over six months. He could not say what she was. His brother and two strangers were there that nieht. He stopped there half-an-hour after the police left the place. The occupants of the house were the defendant, her sister, and a servant. Lily Clarke deposed that she had resided with defendant for the

last eighteen months. The house was not, to her knowledge, a brothel. Alice Hartley said she had known Miss Whelan for a number of years—they had gone to school together. Witness was on a visit at Miss Whelau's house, and had been there a week. James Bevege, storekeeper, carrying on business in Cook-street, deposed to having let a house to the defendant. He was the owner of the house. Defendant had occupied the house for about eighteen months. She was the occupier of the place, and paid the rent. The accused reserved her defence, and was committed to take her trial at the next criminal sittings of the Supreme Court, bail being allowed, accused in her own own recognisances £50, and other two sureties of a like amount. Several other cases of a similar nature were adjourned until next week.