RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Cromwell Argus, Volume V, Issue 258, 8 September 1874, Page 6

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thursday,, Sbptej&br 3, 1874. , \ (Before.J). 4. Jptly, >.jP,/ John Brady,-for drunkenness, was fined 40»., or three 1 days' imprisonment.'

/Friday, September 4, 1874. (Before W.-'Latofience Simpson, Esq., R.M.)

civil, cases. Max Gall and Co. v. J. B. Cowan.— Claim of £2 3«. (H.» for .medicines supplied. « . Mr F. J. Wilson appeared for plaintiff 5 Mr Cowan conducted his Own casV '■

Max Gall, chemist and'druggist, produced his books, proving that at different times he had supplied defendant, on T)r Stirling's prescriptions, with pills, fiowders, mixtures, daughts, &c, to the value of the amount sued for. Mr Cowan said the summons was issued in the name of Max Gall and C 0.," and he produced a Gazette containing notice of a dissolution of partnership between Max Gall and Bobert W. Stirling, as from August 1. Therefore, as the summons was dated the 28th, he held that it was a summons from a nonentity. No such firm was in existence: Max Gall was authorised by the notice to collect debts, and he should sue ; certainly not the firm, who had no. existence. The case, he held, must therefore be dismissed.

Mr Wilson combated this argument. The firm still existed in liquidation. The Magistrate agreed with Mr Wilson, and was entirely against Mr Cowan. The notice in the Gazette did not authorise Mr Gall to sue, only to collect. '"■'' .

After some further argument., it was arranged to leave the case oyer until after lunch. Mr Cowan then admitted the correctness of his Worship's ruling to a certain extent. But he would quote "Ohitty," who kid it down that, in case of dissbuitiMi, tbexdebts may he sued for by the firing unless an express statement is made in the notice of dissolution, that a certain person has been'appointed to receiveand collect moneys. He argued, therefore, that had nothing been mentioned in the notice of dissolution as to Max Gall being authorised to receive moneys, &c, then, although he carried on the business, the firm could sue as in the present instance ; but mention having been made to that effect, Max Gall only could sue. Mr Wilson contended that no such statement v"\s " expresslv" made in the no'tice. He was very clear on the point, having had occasion to look it up quite recently in, connection with a casein another district. " Linley on Partnership" was very convincing on this point, and be was sorry he had not brought the book with him from Glyde.. The Magistrate pointed out that the composition of the notice in the Gazette was as follows : "Max Gall will continue to carry on the business, and (vri'lcovtime) to receive and pay, &c." He must decide, that the summons was perfectly formal. '■'• ' ijii: v'i Mr Oowah said he had!ibeen so positive that the point he had raised, could not \£> got over, that he had not subpoenaed his wopesse. He could prove, by medical and chemical evidence, that tiie charges in the.account were v eXcessiv'e find extortionate. His ■ were r Dr Thomson, of Clyde; chemist, of Clyde ; and T)r Corse, of CroinweH. "He would ask for an adjr urnment. Adjourned accordingly for one week. James Hazlett v. J. La Fontaine.—Claim, £3l 7s. Bd., for goods supplied. The defendant admitted the debt, and was willing to pay half at present, but would like six weeks in which to nav the remainder. Mr Simpson granted him a fortnight. LICENSES. Ann Box applied for permission to absent herself from her licensed house, James Stuart to tnke charge of it. Mr Stuart stated he had purchnsed the hotel, and wished to go legally to work to occupy it. The Magistrate said he could not erant the present application, hut would advise Mr Stuart to take out a temporary transfer. The revenue would not then suffer; For Mr Jaggar, who occupied the position of lessee of ±he Sluicers' Arms, Kawarau Gorge, for which house A. Olsen, proprietor, had made an application similar to the; foregoing, Mr J. B. Cowan appeared. The lessor and lessee in this case steemed to be in dispute,, and Mr Olsen now applied for leave to withdraw his application, (which had been adjourned from last Court-day.) Leave was given as requested.'