Resident Magistrate's Court, TE AROHA. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 5th.

Te Aroha News, Volume VI, Issue 340, 6 February 1889, Page 2

Resident Magistrate's Court , TE AROHA. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY sth.

(Before H. W. Northcroft, Esq., E.M). Piako County Council v. Chas. Gray, claim 14s 7d ; nrrears of rates. Mr Jas. Craig, junr., appeared on behalf of defendant, and stated that he never at any time owned the property in respect of which he was now Rued ; and also put in a letter from defendant to that effect. Judgment for 14s 7d, and costs 7s against Chas. Grey, or owner Sume v. C. Kveritt, chiim 2s lid ; arrears of rates 5 , JJq (ippeaiance of de-

fendant. Judgment for 2a lid, and costs 6e. Same v. Edwin Htjdfield, claim £1 4s 4d ; arrears of rates. Defendant stated he had never received any demand for the' rates prior to service of summons, and was not liable for the amount sued for. Mr Tuck, clerk to Piako County Council, stated the detnapd had been made in the usual way. In reply to the defendant Mr Tuck said he had tried to recover the amount of the rates owing froiP Mr Murray, the owner of the property, but being unable to get any~ thing from that source, he had to ' go ' for the occupier—Mr Hadfield, Defendant stated that he had been very badly treated by Mr Murray, that he had paid him a sum of money as agreed upon, but that Mr Murray on hit, part had never carried out the agreement, or given him the transfer of title to the land ; and in support of his statement handed His Worship an agreement made between himself and Muiray. He admitted owing rates on two of the sections mentioned, containing about 60 acres of land, but never had anything 4o do with some 80 acres additional, for which he was also sued for arrears of rates, If he cotild only get his transfer he was quite willing to pay any rent or rates he owed ; but as. it was he was unable to crop or improve in any way, being without any title to the land. Mr Tuck said the whole block was valued as one lot by the Proper t}' -Tax Department, but he only wanted to recover the amount fairly due by defendant. He believed the defend?nt had been hardly dealt with and placed in a \ery unfortunate position with respect to this land. His Worship said judgment would be given for the proportionate amount fairly I due by defendant, but he would adjourn the case till next Court day in order that he might go and see for himself what that proportion was. Berry Brown v. Pare Graham (Native), Defendant was charged with the larceny of a saddle, etc., the property of plaintiff. This case waspaitially heard last Court day, and then adjourned for the evidence of Tom Brown, brother of prosecutor, Case dismissed ; the Warden stating the charge of larceny had not been proved, but nevertheless the Natives undoubtedly did wrong in carrying away the saddle. Police v. J. F. Cocks. In this case defendant was charged by Constable Wild with unlawfully using dynamite in a public fishery, to wit the Waihou river, at Te Aroha, on January 17th, 1889, to catch and destroy fish, Defendant pleaded guilty, and was discharged with a caution.