RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXIV, Issue 9660, 14 June 1882, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

"• Tuesday, 18th June. (Before R. Ward, Esq., 8.M.) Drunkenness.— John Leary pleaded guilty to a charge of drunkenness, and was fined ss, in default twenty-four ' hours' imprisonment. I/Aeceny. — Hinerua, a native woman, was charged with the larceny of 15s, the property of Eaupo Waiata, on the 12th instant. She pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to three days' imprisonment. — John Kilty pleaded not guilty to a charge of stealing two blankets, a pair of trousers, and other articles the property of John Leary. — John Leary deposed to having lost a swag containing the articles already enumerated. The articles produced were his, and he neither gave prisoner nor any one else permission to take the articles. — Constable Stanton deposed to prisoner having brought a swag to the police station on the 17th inst. The swag was afterwards claimed by a man named Leary — the last witness. — Detective Jeffery deposed to having seen prisoner Rxainining the swag at the back of certain premises iv Kidg-way-street. — Prisoner denied all knowledge of the offence. — His Worship held the offeuco proved, and simtencod priBoner to three months' imprisonment with, hard labour.

Breach of Bt-i,aws. — A. Ryder was charged,- on the information of Henry James Beid, foreman of works to the Wangaehu Highway Board, with allowing thirteen pigs to wander on the No. 2 Line. — Defendant pleaded not guilty. — Henry James Beid produced an authority from the chairman of the Wangaehu Highway Board authorising him to prosecute. He saw the pigs on the line near Byder's place, and went into Eyder's place and pointed"the pigs out to Mrs Ryder, who admitted the pigs belonged to her; husband. — Sergeant Bisset deposed to 'seeing a number of pigs straying on the line, having gone up the line in company' with" Mr Reid.— Defendant made a long statement attributing the action to malice on the part of the foreman. — His Worship inflicted a fine of 10s and costs. Ltotaot. — "Rewi Baupo was remanded until Friday next for medical examination, on suspicion of lunacy. ■ . , - civil oases. 1 Judgment Summonses.— Fred. Hall v. R. T. Blake. Claim, J533 8s lOd. Mr Fitzherbert, for plaintiff, said an agreement had been come to as to judgment, and his Worship accordingly gave judgment for £17, to be. paid on the 13th July, in default 28 days' imprisonment. — Jas; Signal v. E. T. Blake. Claim, =647 7s 6d. Mr Fitzherbert said a similar understanding had been come to in this case, and his Worship ordered JS24 to be paid on the 13th July, in default 42 days' imprisonment. Property-tax. — O. M. Oombie v. J. ,S. Taylor. Claim, £9 7s 4d.. Mr Fitzharhert for plniutiff ; defendant did not appear. •J. Mcßeth, postmaster, deposed that he had authority to-receive assessments under the Property Tax Act. He had received. 1 no payment from defendant. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs 11s. Defended Cases.— M. V. Hodge v. W. H. Gibson. Claim, £71 11s 4d, for professional services rendered. Mr Borlase for plaintiff, Mr Hutchison for defendant. Walter Nicol Cathro deposed to the amount of the account being due, and to the account having been rendered in July, 1881. Defendant had admitted several times receiving the account. The book produced contained the press copy of the account rendered. — Cross-examined : Mr Gibson a fortnight ago asked witness to render him a more detailed account of the services charged for. The account produced was the one witness tendered him. ■. He made certain additions to the items, but admitted the additions . did not render the account fuller. Thiß was all the evidence. — Mr Hutchison contended that the case could not be sustained, as it was essential that both parties to a suit should be within the jurisdiction of the court. In this case the plaintiff was absent from the : colony, and his friend produced no power ! of attorney authorising him. to appear. . Mr Borlase contended that when a party appeared by counsel it was riot necessary for a power of attorney to be produced, ; but if it was necessary it could be pro- , duced. Mr Hutchison said the power ; of attorney had not been produced, and i cited authority in support of his conten* • tion that, in the absence of the plaintiff s from the court's jurisdiction, a power of . attornoymust be produced. Anumberof . other objections were also urged. Mr i Borlace said if the only objection was j rhe absence of [a power of attorney, that • could easily be got over by its product tion; but, as the attorney -was a lady, , it had been thought that a merely i technical objection could ' be got over ; without necessitating the presence of the lady in court. Hr Hutchison nust be absolved from blame in the matter, ■ as there was nothing to shovr wjio-was the attorney Mr Borlase elected to take a nonsuit, which was , -granted accordingly.— James 'Griffen v. John Smith. Claim, £3. Mr Borlase for defendant. J;unos Griffen deposed to lending defendant pack- horses at 10s a day on various dates. Defendant made the arrangement. Cross - examined : Witness was (.working for defendant at 9s a day like the other men, and his horses were to be paid for ' separately. He thought 10s a day a fair charge for the use of horses. Jeremiah. Joughlin heard the arrangement 1 made by defendunt with plaintiff, when defendant promised to pay him if he would do the packing. By the court : Witness got 9s a. day, and didnotsupply any horses. Mr Borlase said the defence was that the charge was altogether exorbitant. Doubtless plaintiff was entitled to some small consideration, but his charge was altogether too high. John Smith deposed that no understanding had boon come to between himself and plaintiff as to pay for packing. The "tucker arrangement" was that each party should pay equally for the cost of provisions — including packing. Mr McGregor, who did nearly the whole of witness's packing, had r only charged at the rate of os a day. Thomas Bowdern was a partner with Smith on the contract. There was no arrangement with Griffen. Judgment for plaintiff for £2 10s, and costs, expenses of plaintiffs witness being refused.