MAGISTERIAL.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1499, 5 March 1887, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

ASH BURTON— MONDAY. m (Before Mr J. OHivier, R.M.) ,-. . CIVIL OASES Holmes, y. Foster. -f-Glaimi £65,, for. breach of agreement. Mr Wilding a&j peared for the plaintiff, and Mr Cainbertson for the defendant. The following evidence was taken after the adjournment; The evidence for the defence was that; Holmes had failed to carry ont bis . agreement ; that no agreement had been made for seven days' notice ; that two machines had been arranged for, but de^ fendant allowed one machine to start providing the second raaohine arrived on the Thursday; ' The second machine did not - arrive at the time stipulated for.. and Poßtfcr made other arrangement!* The work done by Dynes was done very badly. The crop was out slightly on the , green side. 0. J. Harper deposed as to the amount a machine would oat, and the custom of giving notice when to commence harvesting. Allan Outhbertaon proved) the plaintiff admitted arriving after the time agreed upon, but abated he was not very late and no great, harm hed been done. The orop was dead ripe and the grain was In danger of being blown out. Charles Leech, Donald McLean and F. M. Foste? gave'corroboratlve evidence. Defendant's brother distinctly swore that plaint' ff was expected to bring two maohln'ss to the farm and that the defendant never consented to one maohlne only being employed. After counsel had addressed the Banoh HI I Worship said he was clearly of Opinion that the judgment of the Court mast be ' for 70£ acres at 5a per acre. Regarding compensation, he thought flotttO intflttft had been shown by both sides, out particularly on the part of defendant.. He would give judgment for £17 12s6d for the harvesting done and £12 damages, with coats. Drury v. Cronin.-— Claim, £11 6s, for buggy hire and damage done to a buggy. Mr Wilding for plaintiff and Mr White for defendant. The latter paid into Court the Bum of 19s 6d. Plaintiff deposed he let the baggy for 6a to defendant to go to Ohertsey. The horse was quiet and the buggy m goodorder. When the defendant returned he brought a double buggy inßtdad of the one-let. Defendant said witness's buggy had broken down at Chertsey. Went to Cherfcsey, but could not find it there. Followed thg tracks, and found the buggy m a water race or creek near Ashburton, smashed up. The race was on the side #f the road. Saw the defendant a few days after, and he threatened witness with t% action for £250 damages for "upsetting the miesue." Defendant offered to pay the cost of the damage, and he did get the vehicle repaired, after a .fashion, as tho wheels would not track and the splash board wai loose. The plaintiff wa3 cross* examined by Mr White at considerable length respecting previous damage to the buggy. — Childs,, proprietor of the Chertsey Hotel, deposed that defendant and two ladies called at his place' on the day m question, and had drinks. The buggy appeared to be m good order, j : — Edgington, wheelwright, at South Rakaia, depoßod that the buggy was " shaky," although it had been repaired. The buggy was not worth £5 ?: although plaintiff gave witness £10 for it. Witgave £3 10s for the buggy before he sold it to Drary. The veh'ole was smashed up when witness purchased it. James Mcßae, junior, saw Cronin -and two ladies m Ashburton some time m January. They came to the Central Hotel. Could not say that Cronin was a little the worse for liquor. Mr Wilding elicited the fact that the witness had informed counsel that morning that Cronin was m his opinion the worse of liquor, : This was the whole of the evidence for the plaintiff, and Mr White applied for a nonsuit on the ground that the damage was the result of an accident, no negligence having been proved. His Worship decided to hear the evidence. Cronin, the defendant, gave evidence ot the effect that the accident was certainly not the result of carelessness. Witness - was perfectly sober, Witness offered to pay all the expenses^ but objected to a demand for a guinea made by the. plaintiff for a letter which he had got Wilding and Lewis to write.— — By Mr Wilding ; We came down to Ashborton at a slow trot. The accident took place m the centre of the road.— Defendant's wife gave corroborative evidence. . Hardy, the wheelwright who repaired the buggy, deposed that Oronin bad paid him for the work done. The buggy was a very old one, and muoh decayed m parts. The piece of wood pro* duced was part of the axle of the baggy. It showed that it had been previously craoked- It was nat safe to let the baggy with the axle oracked,— -By Mr Wilding : The buggy was not built to carry three persona, —J. W. Moßae hai been m the livery stable line for about twenty years. The baggy used by Cronin was. a very oldone, and the axle was oraoked. The vehicle hsd evidently been repaired several s times. The raoe where the boggy went m was a very nasty place, almoßt In the centre of the track. Witness wondered why the Road Board had not done some- ' thing to prevent aoclden's there. 'Witness informed Drary that if he subpoenaed him he would have to give adverse evidence m consequence of the state of the buggy.— -This was the whole of the evidence, and his Worship gave jadgment for £4 ss, with costs of two witnesses. The Court then rose.