Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

FniDAY

[Before Thomas Beckham, Esq., R.M.]

Judgments fob Plaintiffs. —W. Brown v. Thoma3 Hawkc, £4 10s.; Aucklund Consolidated Q-old Mining Company v. Hugh Maekie, £12 10s. ; F. Or. Clayton v. Klias Jackson, £4 Gs. 6d. ; James A. Campbell v. George Muule, £4 18s. ; E. Porter and Co. v. Golden Harp Golden Gold Mining Company, £9 15s. 4d. ; same v. Montezmna Gold Mining Company, £5 145.; same v. Mermaid Gold Mining Company, £5 7s. 3d.; same v. Tararu Gold Mining Company, £8 4s. 7d.; same v. Hunts, £2 12s. 6d.; same v. Thrieve. Castle, £5 2s. sd. ; same v. Californian, £2 la. id. ; same v. Southern PaciSc, £4 13s. Bd.; Same v. Success, £8 7s. 8.1.; same v. Prince Ch;n-lie, J 2 18s. sd. ; samo v. Q.ueen of Sheba, £5 14s. lOd. ;• same v. United Kingdom, £14 11s. 7d. ; same v. Black Reef, £114s. 3d. ; same v. Mount Aurum,£s 9s. 2d. ; came v. British Crown, £3 11s. ; same v. Manukau Extended, £2 lls.; Samuel Marks v. Alfred Barchard, £1 16a.; Superintendent v. Prince Charlie Gold Mining Company, 16s. ; same v. Californian Gold Mining Company, £2 Bs.; J. Davies v. It. Atkinson, £5 ; Superintendent v. Crescent Gold Mining Company, £19 ; Field v. W. W. Taylor, £1 19s. lOd. Adjoukned.—John Peach v. Terence Cavanagh, £20. - - . -- - Unsatisfied Judgment.—ln the case of E. George and Co. v. Henry Berge, a case of uusafisfied judgment for £3 'Us. 7d., the Court ordered a warrant to issue. DEFENDED'CASES. John Mutually v. F. G. Clayton.—Claim £6 95., for work aud labour.—Mr. Joy for the plaintiff, and Mr. Brookfleld for the defence. —-After hearing the evidence, the Court:gave judgment for the defendant. James Cox v. James Jackhan. —Claim £21 65., for goods supplied.—Mi*. Joy for the plaintiff, and Mr. James Kussell for the defendant. After hearing the evideuce, which was very conflicting, :- the Court ordered a nonsuit to be. recorded. . fu^tj ; ■ .. JLJ : E. Arnold y. A. Gtloyee.—Claim £4 ss. 6d., for goods. Judgment for the; plaintiff; This was all the business.. ; v'; j •5 i'

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS18701014.2.15

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Auckland Star, Volume I, Issue 239, 14 October 1870, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
339

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Auckland Star, Volume I, Issue 239, 14 October 1870, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Auckland Star, Volume I, Issue 239, 14 October 1870, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert