RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Timaru Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 3582, 24 March 1886, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

« TlMAßU— Tuesday, Makch 23hu. (Before J. S. Boswick, Esq., R.M., T. W. Half, Esq., 11. J. LeCren, Esq., and E. Acton, Esq., J.P'a.) NEGLBCTINO TO ItSGISTEIt A BIBTII. W. S. Armitago was charged with this offence, and on his admitting it was fined 6s. CIVIL CASE 3. Judgment by defaidt was given m the following ca^e?, with costs: — B. Hibbard v. Rd. Sibly, claim £10 Os 7d ; Moir and McKay v. J. Hall, claim £912a Id ; Gabites and Plante v. E. Rooney, claim £G 19j sd. A. v. Westerman— Claim, £1. Weslerman atatad that he had called twice at Shemitl's yards and ho was not m. He had no intimation that ho was going to be sued. Ho thought it was an unjust tiling to do. Judgment was given for amount claimed and costs. Mclntosk and Co. v. Brcen— Claim, £1 18s, judgment Bunimons. Tho plaintiff proved that defendant was m work and earning fair wages. Tho Bench ordered defendant to pay, after two mouths, 5s per week ; m default 14 day's imprisonment. Li<;htband, Allen nnd Co. v. Armstrong — Claim, 16s 6d, judgment summons. W. F. Potts, agent for the plaintiffs, proved that the defendant was drawing regular ■wage 3. The Bench ordered tho amount to be paid m two instalments— ono m a week's time and one m a fortnight. Harm and Son v. J. Howie— Claim, £27 13s 2d. Mr Toss will for the plaintiffs. This case was m connection with a promissory note, and it will be heard m Christchurch. Irvine v. G. Colo— Claim, £5. Mr Hamersley for tho phintiff and Mr O. T H. Perry for tho defendant. A set-off for £5 was put m for paddocking a hack filly. A. Irvine, the plaintiff, stated ho did not admit tho set-off by Colo for paddocking tho horse. He said ho was willing to pay a reasonable rate, but not 4s a week, A reason.

ahla rato would bo about Is or Is Cd a week. To Sir Perry : Ho fed tho filly morning and night. Sho was right enough when she went to Cole's. lie sold her after ho loft Cole's. There was not much grass m tho defendnnt's paddock. Ho bought oats and chaff from defendant to feed tho horso with. To Mr Hamersley : Ho had to look after Cole's horses. When ho was engaged Colo told him to take tho filly up with him as there was plenty of feed. Cole settled up with him from time to time, but ho never said anything about tho set-off. Ho only fed tho filly with tho scrapings from the other horses' boxe3. Ho went to Cole's to work on the llt'i April. To tho Bench : He took no oats and chaff from the stable m town to the farm. R. Cole, tho defendant said tho plaintiff had been m his employment on his farm. He had a grey hack there. He brought the hack out with him. His (defendant's) horses were fed at tho feeder, but plaintiff's at a separate box by itself. Oat 3 and chaff wero m the box. Plaintiff's hack was fed night and morning. If ho fed tho other horses more than twice, ho used to feed his own as well Ho charged him 43 a week for tho feed, and would not like to do it for less. When he came he asked plaintiff what wa?e3 he wanted, and he said current rates, and it was agreed that ho should get £1 a week— tho samo that Mr Page paid. He charged him 43 a week for feed and padilocking from tho 2nd of May to the 22ud of October, when he left. Witness made up tho account, and tho plaintiff said it was rather much, and asked if ho could not make it less. Hi 3 account was £5, and lie did not disputo tho liability. When plaintiff's horso came out it wa3 m poor condition, and when it went away was m good condition. To Mr H'imerslcy : Tho horso went away m October. It got fat on Danish oats. Plaintiff bought a sack of oats and chaff just before ho went to tho farm, which wa3 about the 10th of April. When he brought the oats, &c, out he put them m his own room whero ho slept. Witness gave him money from time to time as ho wanted it. Ifc did not pay his wages to the 10th September. Witness rold plaintiff Unit Die hoifc wns eating hia head off. He allowed threo weeks to run before he commenced chirking him for the fee j, as by that time his oats would be about done. To the Bench : Witness mado out the setoff at the time he made up the account. William Paul, n farmer at Cliko Klal, said he knew the defendant He saw him at his place, and also a hack belonging to him. He had seen the hack fording m the samo enclosure as Cole's, but m n separate box. It was eating oats and chaff. Jio thought a reasonable charge for feeding the hack would be Is per week. . To Mr Hamerjley : There was one box for Colo's horses and another for the grey horso, as fur as lie could see. Cole's hordes were feeding at the time ho looked into the box the grey horso wa3 feeding at. The box was immediately at the eJge of the enclosure, so he could easily see it. He did net look m the other horses box. How he happened to be at Cole's was because ho had a horse of his own there, and he went to tako it out. He only looked m the feed-box out of-onrioiity. W. G. Cole, jtim*., corroborated tho last witness' evidemv, and added that ho, on ono occasion, spoke to the plaintiff, and asked him if lie was getting tho feed for nothing, and he said " No." To Mr Ilamorali-y : Ho had seen the liohc3 fed between G o'clock and half-past seven m tho morninj, and about six o'clock m the evening. They were usually turned out about nine o'clock at night. There were only two feed boxes, ono being a large trough whero four or five horsos could feed, aud tho other a smoll one, which the plaintiff's horse used. Mr Perry said lint was tho caso for the defence, ndclim; th-it the plair.liii' had admitted that ho was liable to p:iy somethini;. There was Paul's evidence proving that the horse was fed ni^-ht ami morning with oat? and chaff, and he submitted that li a week was a very low rate. The Bench gavo judgment for tho defondant, each sido topnv their own costs. McKibbin v. Cnllnghfiu— thiim, £i 13d Gd. Mr Raymond appeared for the plaintiff. W. McKibbin deposed that lie was a storekeeper at Pleasant Point. Tho defend nt was indebted to him for the amount sued for. Ho admitted the claim with the exception of 10s. Tho goods wero supplied on August 22nd. In posting the entry from tho (lav book to tho leilpi.'r lie cutored it to tho wrong name. (Books put m), lie discovered the mistake about the end of November. It had been entered to Clelland instead of Oiilliighun. no explained the tnisliikc to defendant, to which tho latter replied that ho kopt an account cf tho goods received, and bad got a clean receipt for the goods ho was now dunged with. To defendant : You offered 3s for a clean receipt, but I would not take less than 10s. Callaghan stated that ho had got a clear receipt up to date. To Mr Raymond : He kept, nn account of the goods as lie got them. Whcu lie obtained tho receipt up to date he threw the old piece of paper on which ho wts keeping an account of goods receive) away. lie tool; a memorandum of tho good* became he could not remember them. The Bench jjivc judgment for the plaintiff Tho Court then row.