CIVIL SIDE.

Thames Star, Volume XIII, Issue 4265, 1 September 1882, Page 2

CIVIL SIDE.

Judgments foe Plaintiffs. Thames Produce Co. v. B. C. Long— £212s 7d, goods; costs, 7s. Same r. W*. B. Atherton—£4 4s 3d, goods; costs, Ht Same v. J. McCormick— £l lßs 6d, goods; costs, 7s; Same v. H. T. Bowe—£44 4s lOd, goods; costs, £2 16s6d. W. Cnlpit v. F. Lipsey—£3l, gocds; costs, £1 16s 6d. John Lsydon v. Thos. Manning-*£l 12s 6d, goods ; costs, 7s. Judgment Summons. A. BUBNB V. WM. WHITE. Claim, £19 12s, goods. No arrangement having been arrived at, an order was made for payment at 5s per week, or in default a month's imprisonment: . . M. CASET V. HENST CONBOY. Claim, £5 16s, goods. Defendant deposed that Mr Casey had oilered him work at the Bay of Islands at 8s a day, but people seldom got paid there; for instance, Millett, of Tararu, and the Barbers. He had stated that he would not pay the debt unless compelled to do bo.. ...::. -.. ■■;" , r; . ye ■■:.'. \^ Witness was examined by Mr Brassey as to various jobs of painting he hr.d done. He had not averaged- 5s a week for the past four months. Before that he had not made more than £1 a week. His Worship—lt is about time you turned your attention to something else, if painting does not pay better than that. Witness—Do not intend to work out the debt because Casey sued me. Mr Maurice Casey deposed that Conroy ran no risk of not obtaining his money at the Bay, and he had offered him work. His Worship, said that Gonroy's statement was very unsatisfactory, but. still there was not sufficient evidence to show that be was in a position to pay. How*ever, tbere was £4 10s oomihg to him as back pay for volunteering at Parihakt; if he did not pay it to plaintiff he would be imprisoned for a month. Adjourned for a month.

SPENCER AND PEEK? V. BEHA APEBAHAMA. Claim, £60, money due on agreement. Mr Miller for plaintiff; Mr Brassey for defendant. ; .•;.- _ • .•;.'.--i ;; - "■■, Thomas Spencer depjsed that he and Mr Perry paid defendant £909 towards the purchase of the Kawana Block, To ArohaT They subsequently found negotiation's' could not be carried out, and agrcad to a lease for 21 years. It was arranged that defendant should receive the rents, and he would pay them £60 a year for the money lent until the negotiations could be given effect to. Beba has been in possession up to June, 1882, and the plaintiffs sue for a year's interest. Succeeded in getting the lease registered in March or April this year. The agree» ment was signed in Mr Cuff's office, and the native was sober—for a wonder. The document was read to him. Mr Philip Perry gave corroborative evidence. ' ' The defendant deposed that he knew nothing about the agreement produced, kthe signature was like his. Did not i recollect instructing Mr Cuff to draw up any such document. Bid not know he had to pay Spencer and Perry £60 a year. His Worship cautioned the witness to tax his memory on the point as ulterior proceedings might be taken, but he still adhered to his statement that he knew/ nothing of the document. .^ His Worship said that either there was a conspiracy to rob the native, or he had grossly perjured himself. He thought the native was too clever by half. It was a matter should not be passed over, and the native punished for his conduct. ' Adjourned for a fortnight to enable the plaintiff to procure the evidence of Mr Cuff.