RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Timaru Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 3737, 23 September 1886, Page 3

RESIDENT MA GISTR A TE'S CO UR T.

TEMUKA — Wednesday, September 22nd. (Beforo 3. S. Bcswick, Esq., 8.M., and K. F. Gray, Esq., J.P.) CniMNET ON TIRE. Honry Leo admitted having a chimney on fire on the loth inst. Ho explained that tho blazo was caused by his throwing a quantity of spirits on the fire. He waa fined 103. civil BUSISKSi. J. M. Twomcy v. John Fowler, claim £5 on a promissory note. Jlr Aspinall for tho plaintiff. Defendant did not appear. Judgment was given for the plaintiff for the amount cltiimed with costs. Mr Aspinnllalso claimed interest on the amount, but this was disallowed. F. Oldfield v. W. Ackroyd and M. Quinn, claim £20 Gs 6d. Mr Baymond for tlie plaintiff. Mr Ajpinall for tho defendants. When the caso was called on, plaintiff wn9 not m court. Air Baymond explained that hia client had gono with tin expert to view the land regarding -which the claim, waa under, and had not yet returned. ITo could not proceed with tho caae m tho absence of his principal witness. Mr Beswick said he could cither apply for an adjournment or have ths case struck out. Mr Raymond applied to hare tho caso adjourned. Mr Aspinall was instructed to oppose the adjournment. His clients wore m court and had brought their witnesses with them, some of them from a distance. Mr Beswick said plaintiff was clearly m tho wrong. Aa a matter of principle ho was bound to notice it. Ultimately, the caeo was adjourned, on plaintiff paying the costs. Tho same r. J. Balfour, claim £3 2s. The same counsel appeared. £1 2a 6d wad paid into court, the plaintiff being still absent. Judgment was given for tho amount paid into court. Sirgert nnd Fauvel t. Wright. In this now local cause celehri, Mr Hameruloy, on behulf of tho defendant, applied for a rehearing. Mr Beswick said he could not grant a rehearing. It would be an act of discourtesy to the justices beforo whom tho case had been heard. Doubtless aiTangemontj could be made for tho same justices to sit again and | hear the application, when, if it were granted, he (Mr Beawick) would nrrango to sit with tho justices to hear the caso. Mr Hatnersley said that execution had been issued immediately after judgment. Ho asked for a stay of execution, pending tho hearing of tho application. The court refuced to grant any stay. Tho court then adjourned.