RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Taranaki Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 8726, 12 March 1890, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday March 11. — Before Major Tiike*-—*

Judgment Summons. — 1\ P. Corkill (Assigace of book debts of C. F. Hare) v. Carl Franz, jun. Mr Samuel for plaintiff, Mr Hughes for defendant. — Defendant said that three years ago he undertook to pay the account, which was £12 17s Bd. lie had been bush-felling lately, and four of them had felled 131 ai-res at 17s fid per acre, which would make about £28 each. A storekeeper in Stratford got an order from him for £11 3s for goods supplied. Ho preferred to pay the man who kept his family alive than obey v judgment. lie t paid £3 to a brother. There was £22 to be paid for wages to bush fellers. He was in partnership with Mr PattefsonV who had £30 to draw on a contract', and had already drawn £10. The dynamite, tools, and tucker money had to be considered in this contract. — Louis Patterson said that Franz worked with him on a contract at Kaitako. There had been £10 drawn on the contract, and £2 ( J 5s was still due.— Mr Samuel asked witness if Franz was a partner of his on this present contract at Kailake. — Witness : Yes, he is; and shares equally with me. — Mr Samuel: Did you not tell Mr Corkill that he was employed by you as a laborer at 8s per day ? — Witness : No ; 1 did not. — Mr Samuel : Did you tell Mr R. | Baylcy ? — Witness : Yes; 1 did. — Mr Samuel : Then you told an untruth. — | Witness : Yes. —Mr Samuel : Are you telling untruths or the truth now ?—? — Witness : I am telling the truth. —Mr Samuel : Why did you tell an untruth to Mr Baylcy ?— Witness : Because it is not always wise to tell tho truth, especially in Taranaki. It is not wise to let cvcrylody know your business or what you are doing. — At this stage a very heated discussion took place between witness and Mr Samuel, the latter demanding which was the truth in his two statements, and the former vehemently staling, " I am here as a witness in the box." — The witness on being I told that he would have to answer stale!" that Franz was his partner, and not i laborer on the Kaitake job, which lastec £or 16 days. — After counsel had spokei His Worship made an order for Franz tr pay within one month, or seven dayf imprisonment.

Judgment for Plaintiff.— New Ply mouth Sash and Door Company V John Minchin. Mr Samuel for plaintiff defendant appeared in person. — The clam was for £1 10s for a wine press, which, ii Avas alleged, was not made to order. — E H. Tribe, secretary of the factory, and F Snowball, manager of the factory, gay evidence as to the wine press being mad' in December, 1888, for 30s, and was duly sent to Mr Minchin. The latter stated the press was made according to order. Heard nothing of the matter until October, 1880, when Minchin came. in and said the price was £1, but witness replied that it was 30s, but rather than have any bother he would take 255, but Minchin would not give that. Minchin never came near after getting the press in December, 1888, to October, 1889 — Defendant said £1 was the price agree( upon. He used the press for two months —Judgment was given for plaintiff, witl costs £1 9s Gd. — Same v. J. Buttenvorth— claim £2 Is 4d. Judgment was given for plaintiff, with costs 16s 6d. The Court rose.