RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, TE AWAMUTU.

Waikato Times, Volume XXII, Issue 1872, 5 July 1884, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRA TE'S COURT, TE AWAMUTU.

Thur^dav.— (Before Mr H. W. Northcroft, R.M., ann Messrs Tole, Rutherford, Tayloi, J. H. Maudeno aud Capt Bockctt, J.P.) Civil Oases. Mrs W. Corkov v. John Allen, debt £10 13s 2d.— Mr Gresham for plaintiff.— The plaintiff being sworn, deposed that she was an executor under the will of the late William Corboy, and that defendant was indebted in that amount to the estate. No appearance of defendant. — Judgment for full amount and costs. Same v. Charles Temple. — Mr Geesham for plaintiff —Dishonoured promissory note and interest. — No appeaiance of defendant. — Judgment for full amount and costs, £2 11s. Same v. Worthington, debt £3 8s lOd. —Defendant paid in £'& 6s lOd, being two shillings less than amount claimed. —The plaintiffs solicitor claimed the balance not paid and hearing fee, 5s. — No appearance of defendant. — Judgment tor

T. Gresham v. Noka.— Judgment summons, £5 is Gd. — Adjourned till next court-day. Hunaitemoa v. Gillies. — Mr Cfiesham for defendant.— No appearance of plaintiff.—lf; appeals that Mr O'Neill had also been retained in this case by the defendant, and had applied for an adjournment after consulting with Mr Hay, the counsel for the plaintiff. — Mr Gresham having objected to adjournment, the bench retired to consider what course they should take.— His Woiship, the R.M., said he could not sco that there could be any other way than to adjourn the case, the counsel on both sides having agreed to an adjourn ment. There was a letter beioro the court showing that an agreement had been mutually arrived at. It would be manifestly unfair to the other side after the counsel for the defence had agieed to &n adjournment. The bench would, therefore, grant the adjournment applied for by Mr O'Neill, — Mr Grenham asked that the witnestes' expenses be paid. — His Worship said the bench could entertain no such application. They could only entertain the agieement entered into between Mr O'Neill and MiHay.— Mr Gresham wanted to know upon whom the expenses of the adjournment fell. Neither he nor his client had heard anything of the agreement for an adjournment until the previous evening. The case had been adjourned from the last court day through no fault ot his client, and now through no fault of his (Mr Gresham) it was proposed to adjourn again. He was sorry to try the patience of the bench, but tbe circumstances were such that he must oppose the adjournment.—His Worship told Mr Gresham that his client M-as entirely in the hands of his solicitor, Mr O'Neill. Mr O'Neill had agreed with Mr Hay that the adjournment should take place, and Mr O'Neill was Mr Gillies' solicitor. He considered that if any one had been badly used in this matter it was the gentleman who occupied the bench, having come long distances at great inconvenience to themselves to hear this particular case. Directly the [ defendant in this case engaged counsel he was entirely in his counsel's hands. Mr Gresham desired to impress upon the hench that Mr O'Neill was not the solicitor in the cause. Mr Gillies, the defendant said he had employed Mr O'Neill in addition to Mr Gresham. Hia Worship adjourned the case till next court day. On ouch terms as Mr Hay and Mr O'Neill had agreed to. AY. T, Millar v. A. Campbell. —Debt, £16 17s Bd.— Mr Gresham for plaintiff. The plaintiff being sworn, deposed he was formerly licensee of the Alpha Hotel, Kihikihi, and that the defendant boarded at his hotel in Kihikihi from the 22nd August to the 20th September, and that the drinks served to him were served as a boarder. Mr Brant, manager for plaintiff, lent defendant £4 on behalf of plaintiff. This, with drinks, board, and some other items, furniture, &c., made up the amount claimed. The defendant disputed the amount on the ground that in Mr Millars establishment drinks were often put down to people who never had them, and that every Tom, Dick, and Harry presided behind the bar, and made entries in the book. He denied ever having had drinks without paying for them on the spot, except when he assisted behind the bar, and on such occasions he considered it a barman's privilege to have free drinks. He admitted having been frequently on the spree during the time he boarded with plaintiff and acknowledged that on such occasions he was frequently without money, and might not have paid for all the drinks he had. Judgment for £9 17s 2d, and costs £5 3s.— This concluded the business.

Written tenders are invited by 4he District Engineer lor the erection of a four-roomed cottage at Alexandra. The Returning Ofßcec of the Taotaoroa District anuonnces the result of .a poll taken at Gorton on the 20th June, re the striking of a special rate. ,' ' The Rey. J. Dukes will preach at both serTice» f a^ the Wesleyan Church, Hamilton, tomorroW) ' ,