MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XXIX, Issue 8517, 8 April 1895, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Mondat, Bth Apbh. (Before Mr 0. 0. Kettle, S.M.) CIVIL BUSINEBS. JtTBGUTBNX SCMHON3B3.

A. J. Cribb (Mr Treadwell) v. W. Laing, claim £5 13s. Ordered to pay within 14 days, or the alternative of 7 days' imprisonment.

tTITDEPBNDED OASES.

In the following undefended cases judgment was given for plaintiff ; — Cummins, Sharps and Co. v. Hoaoi to Wata, claim £6 4s 9d, costs £2 6s 63. and |Marahall v. Aperahama' Tahunuirangi, claim £1 14s 4d, oostß 255. J. Watt v. Roka Rupuka, claim £11 ss. Judgment for £6 9s, with coats £2 ss, interpreter's fee 21b. Collier and Co. (Mr Treadwell) v. J. H. ] O'Kelly, claim £9, costs 18» 6d.

1. M. Stephens t. M. Foley, claim £5 12i, costs Bs. Mary Rouxbeneson v. J. Keating, claim £2 10s, costs 6s.

DEFENDED OASES.

J. H. Whiting v. John Watson» Mr Marshall for plaintiff, and Mr Wait for defendant. The claim was for a certain fishing boat to the value of £10, the property of the plaintiff, and taken by the defendant on or about Ist March last. Adjourned until the 22nd for terms of settlement to be carried oat.

J. A. Fothergill v. C. J. McCarthy, claim £41. Mr Borlase for plaintiff, and Mr Hogg for dsfendant. Plaintiff stated that he was a commercial traveller, and was staying at the Rutland Hotel on the 19th September last. At that time he had a sum of £40 7s on him when he retired to bed. The notes, being principally in £5 Bank of New Zealand wore in a pocket-book in tbe tail pocket of his coat, and tb« single noter. and loose silver were in his tro«oers pocket* The money was taken from the pocket book, but the latter was left. Reported the matter to Mr MoOartby. Was awaro that the back door of the hotel bad been left open for the convenience of lodgers who might bs late, but no nighc porter was kept. By Mr Hogg — There was a table in the room, but so far as he could remember there was no plaoe where he could have plaoed the money. It did not occur to him to ask Mr McCarthy to take it. The date was that of the fire at Tustin's shop in tlie Avenue, but could not say who was about. There wae a key in the look to his bedroom but he did not look tho door, because he was afraid of fire and not of thieve*. Had resumed the practice of looking his door since the robbery. It was usual in a good hotel to keep a night porter. At thia itage it was decided that argument as regards the legal aspect of the case be arranged later on, Mr Barnicoat being engaged in the Supreme Court. J. Williams v. O. S. Budge, claim £19 IBs 4d. Mr Lloyd for plaintiff and Mr Borlase for defendant. Adjourned until 10.30 next morning and the Court rose.

For continuation of Reading Matter see Fourth Page.