S.M. COURT, PATEA.

Patea Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 96, 12 August 1895, Page 2

S.M. COURT, PATEA.

Friday, August 9th, 1895,

(Before 11. W. Brabant, "Esq , S.M.) T. Kells v. Baldwin; j.s. Hamerton for plaintiff. Defendant was examined as to his means of paying the amount of the claim, during which he stated that he had no property of any description, and owing to heart disease was not always able to work, and was not always able to get work when be could work. He at one time owned three cows, but he was obliged to qell them to Messrs McCarty and Hunger aoout four years ago. He now rented the cows from the owners and paid 24s per year for them, and he had the increase. He could not make any offer of payment.

T. Kells, sworn, said: The defendant had dealt with him for many years, and had at first paid very regularly, but on an occasion of a bush contract, when he was employing and keeping some men, he got behind and had not since paid up. De* fendant one time promised to sell a cow by auction and pay him part of the proceeds ; that was within the last three years. The cow was to be sold at Nolan, Nonks and Co’s sale, at Kakaramea. He thought after this defendant told him the cows did not belong to him. He offered Baldwin work, but ho would not do it*.

The S.M. said he did not see his way to make an order, and on the application of Mr Hamerton, the case was adjourned to November Bth.

Harbour Board v. C. Dempsey; claim £9 2*. J udgmeat for plaintiff for amount claimed and Costs los 6d.

County Council v. A. Anderson ; claim £1 16s Gel, rates.

Mr E. C. Horner appeared for the County Council, and proved the service of the various legal notices, and there being no appearnco of defendant, judgment was entered by default for amount claimed and costs.

Police Coliit. Police v. C. Dempsey. Information for allowing chimney to be on fire. Defendant pleaded guilty, and was fined Is and costs 7s.

Police v. J. K. Allison. Mr G. D. Hamer ton for the police, and Mr H. Clarke for defendant.

This was a case brought by the police against the captain of the Salvation Army for obstructing the road, and Mr Hamerton having l opened his case called — Constable Carr, who, sworn, said; He remembered Saturday, the 27th July. On that night, while he waaon duty in town, he saw a crowd of people on the footpath opposite Messrs Gower’s and Mabony’s, and on going there he found they were attracted there by the action of the Salvation Army in holding a religious service in the street. Complaints had been made to him before about it, and he told the defendant to move on, but he declined to do so, and said that be was conducting the service and would take the whole responsibility on himself. lie asked defendant to go down the by-street close by .instead of remaining in the main- street, but he refused to go, and said his conscience would not allow him to do so, and he remained there for twenty minutes afterwards, and has beeu there several times since. They hold a large naptha lamp on the end of a six-feet pole, which causes restive horses to shy. It was impossible to pass down the footpath on that side of the street. The army were in a ring on the road, occupying about to the middle of the road. It is the most central place in the town. On Sunday evenings worshippers to three churches have to pass them. He asked the defendant to go down the by street, but ho replied that he would not get the people there.

Cross-examined by Mr Clark: The obstruction was caused by the people crowding on the footnath to watch the' Salvation Army. The members were certainly an obstruction to the road. By the Court: Where the army were ’standing is the main-street in the borough and I considered it was dangerous to horse riders pr drivers on the road, and to Indies walkjng op the footpath. T|ip army choose just the time that people are going to church, and those going to three churches have to pass by the place. I certainly think it dangerous to people using horses, Defendant refused to go when I told him, and remained there twenty minutes after, and has teen there several times since.

Mounted r constable Hooper, sworn, gave corroborative evidence, and the Magistrate Teserved his decision until next Court day,

Judd v. Judd, Adjournei to September 3rd, at the Waverley Court. The Court then adjourned.