RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1025, 14 December 1883, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

ASHBURTON. — To-day. I* ™ (Before H. 0. S. Baddeley Esq, R.M.) p CIVIL CASES. , Ashburton County Council v. Jones, claim of lls Bd, for rates.—Mr Purnell p appeared for plaintiff. The defence was ] that the defendant had left the district t nearly two years ago, but as he had taken 8 no steps to have his name taken off the . rate roll of the Road Board, judgment j was given for the amount claimed. 3 Leesk v. Maclean, claim of L 5 2s 6d, 3 for work done.—Mr Crisp appeared for . plaintiff, and Mr Branson for defendant, f —The plaintiff gave evidence to the effect . that he entered into a contract with Mr 3 Maclean to stump a quantity of gorse t hedge at a certain price, and had received t a cheque less the amount claimed, which 7 was disputed. Witness was cross-ex- , amined as to the correctness of the ’ measurement of the work, and after furr ther evidence, judgment was given for . L 3 16s. , Smith v. Hoathen, claim of L 3 15s, for . goods supplied.--This was a claim for the price of a range, and the defendant said i he was willing to pay if a defective oven , door was repaired. The case was ad- , journed for a week to enable the repairs , to be effected. , Fleming v. Bolton and Addis, claim of L 22, for shares.—Mr Wilding . appeared ! for plaintiff, and Mr Branson for Bolton. —The plaintiff gave evidence that he sold t ten shares in the Flemington Factory to defendants. ;Vddis had paid for four, hut was also interested in the other six. The transfers were made out and signed and stamped by plaintiff, Addis also signing. Bolton did not sign, and when asked afterwards, said he would do so at some other time. In October, Bolton said he had not got his wages, but would settle for the shares in three weeks. On November 26 he refused to carry out the transfer, — Cross-examined : Bolton agreed to take the shares under any circumstances, and not if he had the money to pay for them.-—Stephen E. Poyntz, secretary of the Cheese ’ and Butter Factory Company, gave evidence that the plaintiff was registered proprietor of six shares. The document produced was an transfer form of shares, and was prepared by witness. Had never seen Bolt n to his knowledge.—John Bell deposed that Bolton had been in his employ, and remembered hearing plaintiff asked for the money which was refused, but said something to the effect that when he received his wages he would settle up. —Cross-examined: Bolton refused an advance of L 5 offered by witness towards the purchase of the shares.—For the defence, Mr Branson said that his contention was that there was no contract binding on his client to purchase. The matter was left in abeyance, and whsp the value , of the shares went down Bolton refused to invest.—The defendant, Bolton, deposed that Fleming asked him to purchase the shares, and he (witness) consented to do so if he had the money. Subsequently he met plaintiff at Mr Bell’s stables. Re- 1 fused to take the sh^S-—j-His Worship ‘ said that no doubt a contract had been 1 entered into, and judgment would be for * the amount claimedi with costsi L 4 7s. * Sealy Bros v Bosenberg, claim of L 5 J 14s, for goods supplied. Mr Crisp appeared for plaintiff, and after hearing evidence his Worship gave judgment for the £ amount claimed and costs. a