RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wanganui Herald, Volume VIII, Issue 2654, 14 December 1875, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday, Dec. 14, 1875. [Before Major iSdwanl.s, R.M.] S. Neary v. J. Soler.— Mr Hodge appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Hutchison for the defendant. ~; : Mr Hodge wished Dr."-Wilkins to be .called on his subpoena,-as'--'ho-- was told that he was not in attendance. This Avas done, and Dr. Wilkins did not answer. Mr Hodge applied for an adiournnient. J Mr Hutchison said he did not apply for costs for himself, but when he had the case adjourned before, he had taken the precaution, to warn all the witnesses they need not attend. He had one witness in attendance. Mr Hodge said that his client would go on with the case. Mr Hutchison then took an objection to the plaint that there were ho particulars. After some conversation the- plaiut was amended tf for work done as an ordinary servant." Mr Hutchison then took ah objection •that the real cause of action was in Mr Neary, and that there was a non-joinder, and theCourtjcould not allow : that correction to be made... Mr Hodge applied for Mr Neary to be joined as a plaintiff. Mr Hutchison objected, and said that plain till: must be non-suited. The Court decided that they could not allow the joinder. Mr Hodge then stated his ease, and called : — Ann Neary—l live in Bell Street.- I knew Mrs Soler. I was sent for at night, on the 21th August. I went there. The baby was nearly born when I got there. I had no engagement to attend her. I remained there until 9 o'clock next morning. I remained there altogether fourteen days. I went home occasionally . I was washing, scrubbing, and sometimes sitting up. My charge is 30s per week. I was : called away do go to other places. ... Gross-examined—l do. not not know: why they came to me. except that I am in the habit of going out. When T went there there was no work as a midwife for me to do. The child was partly born. I was there for ■ fourteen days. I did what I ordinarily do. I tell people I cannot stay day and night. Lremained there until Tripe had been there. Mrs Soler's sister did not ask me to send for a doctor. Mrs Soler did not ask me to send for a doctor. I did not say it was not a case for a doctor. (Part of the examination is not fit for publication). They did not ask me to send for a doctor. I left the place' because I was disgusted. I left because I was called to.another, con-,. tinement. Ido not charge as a midwife, I charge for the work I do. Tchargi 30s per week as an ordinary servant. °I was not there as an ordinary servant I went there as a woman to attend another in her confinement. Re-examined—While I wasin the house I never meddled with Mrs Soler except to bring the baby. It was my wish to send for the doctor. It was not a full grown child. They had just taken her out of a warm bath. Her husband had borrowed "Aristotle " for her to read and it frightened her as she was brooding over it. J.L). Tripe deposed—l saw Mrs Soler on the 3rd Sept in conjunction with Dr Wilkin. I attended her up to the 18th September; she was suffering from exhaustion. There were several similar cases of fevers in Wanganui at the time. Mrs Neary should have sent for a doctor. I do no not think she did her duty. Cross-examined—This was a critical case,and a doctor should have been called in. This closed the plaintiff's case. Mr Hutchison submitted that the reply of Dr Tripe settled the case. :He had heard the evidence and stated that she had not done her duty. ' ' ■ " Mr Hodge'said the defendant had called no witnesses and all the Court could do would be to order a non-suit. The Court said that they could not think that the plaintiff had done her duty properly, and she must be non-suited. Non-suited with costs. T. V. Brown v. George Ross. Mr Hutchison said that this was a claim for £15. The defendant was a stakeholder in a bet between the, plaintiff and Emery to the amount of £30, the dispute being whether it was lawful to pay wages in a public house. Brown said it was not lawful, and Emery said it was. The matter was referred to a solicitor and he ; decided against Brown. The plaintiff then demanded his shakes from the defendant. Now in making this decision the party had overlooked the 12th section of the Act of 1875 which specially provides that no wages shall be paid in any public house. ''" Thos. V. Brown-stated the facts of thecase and that he protested against the money being paid to Emery. Mr Ross said he was the stakeholder and acted on the written opinion of Mr Eitzherbert that Emery had won. The plaintiff protested before the money was paid. over. The Court said there was no question about the law and the facts of the case p'nd they . must give judgment for the plaintiff. W. Timms v. J. Stewart. .Mr Hodge for the plaintiff and Mr Hutchison for defendant. This was a judgment summons for £15. John Stewart deposed—l am working for the Town Board and get 7s per day and have Is 3d per day pension. Cross-examined—l • have not been in constant work on account of wet weather. I have not been in a position to pay it and I will not pay a farthing. I was in a position to pay it, but he never told me I owed him a penny. The Court—Have you been in a position to pay it or any portion of it since the judgment was obtained ? Defendant—l could have paid it but he

never told, me I owed him money and I never will pay it. Mr Hutchison—The defendant has a claim foi work done as a set-off. Mi: Hodge—You cannot go behind the judgment. But we have no wish to be harsh or oppress him, and will give him every latitude. Mr Hutchison—l suggest that the case be postponed for a month, in "order to give the defendant time to bring his cross action. -The Bench consented to this, and made an order for the money to be paid on the 13th January 1876 or in default to gc to gaol for one month. That would give him ample time to bring his cross action. Norcross v. Bason.—ln this case the Court decided that another summons must issue to be left at the last place of abode, as they did not think the rule of the Country Courts at home applied here, and that service on the gaoler would be sufficient. The Court then rose.