RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, CROMWELL.

Cromwell Argus, Volume III, Issue 129, 30 April 1872, Page 6

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, CROMWELL.

Thursday, April 25. (Bi’foiv E. If. Came, AV/., 11. M.) Furiously Driving Loose Horses. —James Scott appeared in answer to a summons fur driving certain horses furiously through the main street of (’min’,veil on Sunday, the 21st instant. The Bench, after hearing several witnesses, considered there was no evidence against the defendant, and dismissed the charge.—John I’olloek. appeared to answer to a similar charge, and the Bench considering the charge proved, indicted a line of Ida., and 9s. costs.

Charge or Assault. —!l. llorrohin r. ocargo Smith.. This case arose out of the late election for Kaw,trail Ward. Mr Allanhy represented the defendant. It appeared from the evidence that on the day of the election the plaintiff was dragging about the street an ctiigy of the successful candidate, and intended to set lire to it near Smitham’s stables ; but the Police-sergeant warned him not to light a lire within the Municipality. The cliigy was then taken across the bridge and burnt. The defendant appeared not to relish this behaviour of the plaintiff's, and interfered with him ; a scrimmage ensued, but who was the aggressor, or whether anyone was hit at all, was not clearly shown. The Magistrate said he"considered the matter a very paltry one, and even if the plaint-ill’ was struck, he appeared to have brought on the affray himself. Case dismissed.

A Peculiar Case.— Marsh v. Wacber. This was a claim to recover ss. (hi. for the repair of a brooch, it appeared from the evidence that the plaintiff’s daughter h;id some mouths since left a brooch at the shop of the defendant (a jeweller in Cromwell) to have some slight repairs done to it. The defendant was not in at the time. After the brooch had been returned to the plaintiff daughter it was discovered to have been injured, and it was sworn to on behalf of the plaintiff that it had not that injury when left at defendant's shop. The brooch was afterwards taken to another jeweller (.Mr Murrell), and was repaired by him, and he charged and was paid the amount now claimed. The defendant swore the injury had been done to the brooch before it was left at his shop, but it appeared that he only knew this from having been told it by the man in the shop, Ho had not snhpmnacd this man to give evidence. He believed the man was at Bannockburn. The plaintiff said he did not care about the amount, hut on principle he objected to see children taken in by unskilful workmen. The Magistrate stated that in the face of :he positive evidence adduced fur the plaintiff, and

the fact of the defendant not having broi any to contradict it, he had no alternative to give judgment for the amount claimed costs. DEBT CASES. Cowan and Shanly (as Trustees of the E s of John Halliday) v. Jas. Aitehison.—This an action In-ought to recover the sum of £43 Bd. on a dishonoured acceptance. Mr Wj] appeared for the Trustees in this and the foil ing cases. There was no appearance for d e dant. A. D. Harvey, registrar of the Digf Court, Clyde, produced the deed of agrees “ Halliday to Cowan and Shanly.” The d was then proved by W. W. Wilson (the att ing witness), and put in. It appeared by deed that Mr Halliday had assigned, inter r all his book debts to James Cowan and Will Shanly in trust for his creditors. John Hallii then proved the signature to the acceptance,; that no part of it had been paid. Judgment amount claimed, with 455. costs of Court ; 425. professional costs. Cowan and Shanly v. Simon Aitehison.— f was a similar case to the last. Judgment 1 given for amount claimed, £39 10s. 5d., v 455. Court expenses, and 425. professional coCowan and Shanly v. John Bruce.—Clai £SO, also on a dishonoured acceptance. raent for amount claimed, 355. Court expe® and £3 3s. professional costs. Cowan and Shanly v. John Bruce.—A seco claim against the same defendant. Judgnit for amount claimed, £44, with 30s. Court t ponses, and 425. professional costs. Cowan and Shanly v. Lewis M‘Gregor.—Jnj merit for amount claimed, £2l 9s, costs of Coe 305., and solicitor’s fee 425, Cowan and Shanly v. Samuel Bottrell a: another.—Claim, L.6 11s, Id. The defends appeared and admitted the debt, but stated tb owing to the great scarcity of water for mini purposes lately, he was quite unable to pay it present. Judgment for amount claimed, wi; lbs. costs, and 21s. solicitor’s fee: L.3toi paid within a month, and the balance wills two months.

Cowan and Shanly v. Peter Bissett. Claii L.5 3s. r l'!io defendant appeared and admitti the debt, but asked for time to pay it in, fort: same reason as that urged by the defendant the previous ease. Judgment for sum elaime 13s. costs of Court, and 21s. s dicitor’s fee: In to be paid in one month, and the balance witli two months.

Cowan and Shanly v. Samuel Bottrell. —De admitted. Judgment for L. 16 9s. 6d., Cud expenses 10s., and solicitor’s fee 21s. : to be fa. in monthly instalments of L.3 each, —payrat to commence three months from 25th inst.

Cowan and Shanly v. W. Giver.—Claim, I 10s. Judgment for amount claimed, with 1? Court costs, and 2ls. professional fee : to be fa within three months.

Cowan and Shanly v. A. Chadwick.— Clait L.S 15s. Defendant did not appear. H, \] Smythies, collector for the Trustees, prove I tb defendant had admitted the debt, and had pai L.2 on account upon the understanding that si weeks’ time was to be given to pay"the balanci and that no costs (other than what appearedn the summons) were to he paid by defend, an; the Magistrate gave judgment, in accordant with this understanding, for amount elaime! no execution to issue for six weeks.