DISTRICT COURT. WEDDING. MARTIN—KING.

Colonist, Volume XLVIII, Issue 11686, 23 July 1906, Page 2 (Supplement)

DISTRICT COURT.

WEDDING.

MARTIN— KING.

A sitting of the District Court was held on Friday before Judge Haselden, who waß welcomed by Mr A. T. Maginnity and Mr J. P. Hayes, ifc being his Honor's first appearance in Nelson to preside at the District Court. He very briefly thanked the members of the Bar for their kindly welcome. The only business was appeals against the judgments of Mr H. Eyre Kenny, S.M., given in two suits heard at Collingwood, in which J. A. Dyer and A- F. Berry sought to recover £11 and £15, the values of their bicycles, which were destroyed through fires lighted by George Hickmott's young son. The Magistrate gave judgment in favor of Hiekmott, the defendant, holding that whilst it was clear that Charles Hickmott (defendant's son) ! had his father's authority to light I fires on Hickmott's own land there I was no evidence of any authority, expressed or implied, to go outside the father's land on the public road, and commit the illegal act of lighting a fire there. The fire which had caused the loss of the bicycles had, the Magistrate held, originated on the road, and it would be manifestly unfair to give a judgment for the plaintiff upon the grounds of equity and good conscience. Charles Hickmott's act was outside the scope of his authority and, as far as the evidence went, without the knowledge of his father. Judgment was given for the defendant in each of the actions.

On Friday Mr J. P. Hayes appeared for the appellants (Dyer and Berry), and Mr A. T. Maginnity for tbs respondent (George Hiokmott). The facts being the same in each, it was agreed to take the appeals together. The contention by Mr Hayes was that it did not matter about the authority given by the father to the son, that as the damage was done during the course of young Hickmott's employment, which w?\s for the benefit of the father, the latter was liable for the damage done.

Mr Hayes continued the argument up to the midday adjournment, and Mr Maginnity, for the respondent, occupied the afternoon, and both cited many cases.

At half -past four the District Judge intimated that he \voi;:d reserve his judgment, which world be giyea in writing,

A very pretty wedding was celebrated at the Bapist Church on Wednesday afternoon by the Rev. S. Jenkins and Mr J. J. Franklyn, when Mr Russell D. Martin, late of Sydney, was married to Miss Lillian Jane King, only daughter of Mrs S. Anstice, of Nelson. The bride, who was given away by her brother, Mr E. 11. King, was attired in a pretty white figured silk voile dresSj goffered and trimmed with real lace, and wore the orhodox wreath and veil. She also carried a lovely shower bouquet of Christmaa roses and maidenhair fern, the whole completing a sweet costume. The bride was attended by four bridesmaids. Three of them, Miss J. Pettit, Miss M. Demment (of Lower Moutere), and Miss E. Burge (neice of the bride), wore cream voile dresses, trimmed with satin and lace, and each carried a pretty scarlet bouquet, with red streamers, while little Alice Catesby King (neice of the bride), who was the other bridesmaid, wore a prettty cream silk dress, and carried a basket of flowers. Each bridesmaid wore a handsome gold brooch, the gift of the bridegroom. The bridegroom's gift to the bride was a handsome gold necklace, | set with pearls and turquoises, the | bride's to the bridegoom being a I heavy gold Albert and pendant. Mr H. Ansticp acted as best man, Mr Blair (of Wellington), and Mr H. Pettit acting as goomsmen. After the ceremony, upwards of seventy guests sat down to afternoon tea, when the customary toasts were duly j honored, and the young couple left midst showers of rice to spend the honeymoon at Wellington. They were the recipients of a great many beautiful, useful and valuable presents.