RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Cromwell Argus, Volume V, Issue 266, 3 November 1874, Page 6

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

—-—♦ Friday, October 30,1874. (Before W. Lawrence Simpson, Esq., R.M.)

CLAIM ON I 0 U. Charles M'Kenna v. W. H. Money.—Claim, L.9, being amount of an I 0 U given by defendant to plaintiff for money lent. Mr F. J. Wilson represented defendant, who did not appear. The plaintiff handed in the I 0 U on which he sued, and stated that he lent the defendant the L 9 to make up the purchase money for the mare "Kathleen,"'which defendant bought at Clyde. Mr Wilson, in examination, wished to bring it out that the money was lent to play cards with, and that Money and he were partners in gambling transactions; but M 'Kenna stoutly denied this, although he admitted " plnying-in" with Money at "poker," by which he explained that he meant they agreed not to "rise" on each other's hands of cards. Mr Wilson contended that ana:tion could not hold good on an I 0 U simply. It was no proof in itself of a debt, and particulars must be stated of the debt, an I 0 tJ being of value only as evidence. The Magistrate decided, after taking time for consideration, that Mr Wilson's contention must stand good, and plaintiff therefore had to accept a nonsuit. A DEFAULTING RATEPAYER. Corporation of Cromwell v. John Marsh.— Claim, L 29 17s 6d, being rates due on defendant's property in the town for the year 1873-4, and including a sum of LlO 14s 6d, alleged to be due for rates unpaid since 1869. Mr W. Johnston appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr P. J. Wilson for defendant. Charles Colclough, Town Clerk and Rate Collector, gave evidence respecting assessment and produced books, newspapers and gazettes containing matters relevant to the point at issue, Mr Wilson raised a large number of nonsuit points, and argued upon them at considerable length. In the first plice, the "notices of valuation," rendered by Colclough to Marsh, were altogether insufficient. No particular form of notice was laid down, but it was required to be a full statement of particulars, and these no tices were certainly not that. All were barren in this respect, and some were wanting in the most essential particulars, containing neither date, signature, nor year of assessment. One of them had simply a figure 5, which might mean either pounds, shillings, or pence. He then quoted section 81 of the Act, which states that the allowance of the assessment by the Council shall be made at the first meeting after tie assessment roll has been handed by the Valuator to the Town Clerk ; and being allowed shall be signed by the Mayor. The assessment, as stated by Mr Colclough, was on the first allowanfe by the Council signed by the Mayor, but undated, so that there was no proof as to the allowance having been made at the first meeting, as required. The allowance must, within 21 lays, be given, public notice of; mml *» <&« fow^

i Clerk stated in evidence, this was not done., j The Council i hen re-allowed tho assessment, and the Mayor signed it, and the pubUo.notices Were duly given. But' the second allowance, he oontended, was an illegal one, and the Mayor's signature was illegally fixed. The Council had no power to rescind the first allowance: the law said it must be made at a certain time, and if not then made, he contended proceedings in reference to it must be begun de novo. The twenty-one days ran out as regarded the first allowance, and all the Council's aftet-proceedings in reference to.it were illegal, Mr Wilson also advanced a number of other points. There was no evidence of any declaration of rate, except the statement of the Town Clerk. The person appointed to receive the rate must be appointed by Warrant, and nothing of the sort was produced. Some of the properties for which Mr Marsh was rated were in tenancy, and there was no evidence of the tenants having been asked to pay. Besides the notices of valuation, rate-notices were left; and these were left after the first allowance, and before the second. If the second, therefore, was held good, no such notices had been left as required. Regarding the old rates of 1869, Mr Wilson said there had been no attempt to prove any allowance of assessment. Besides, the defendant had already been sued for these rates. He called Mr Baird, the Clerk, who produced the Court-books, by which it seemed that on two different occasions on which Mr Marsh had been eued by the Corporation, nonsuits were given. Air Johnston then replied to Mr Wilson. He submitted that no notices of valuation were required, and if Mnrsh had anything to complain of in that respect he shonld have appealed against the assessment, as was open to him. The same held good with regard to any irregularity in the proceedings in reference to the allowance of the assessment. If the words "and not otherwise" were added to section 81, ivhich Mr Wiigon relied on so strongly, then his arguments would hold good; but these words not appearing, he contended the action of the. Councli had been perfectly legal throughout. As to the matter of tenancy, the evidence of Mr Colclough was to the effect that tenants were coming and going every week, and it was impossible for him to rate any other person than the proprietor. With regard to the rate-notices, although these were dated before the second allowance of assessment, he was informed by Mr Colclough that they were not delivered until after it had been made, and if necessary he would ask to put Mr Colclough in the box to prove this. The Magistrate Said the Corporation could not succeed as regarded the recovery of the old rates. No public notice of the allowance was proved to have been made, and this was essentially necessary. Therefore he would at once strike off that portion of the amount sued for.. He was not prepared to express a decided opinion as regarded the recovery of the 1873-4 rates, The double signing by the Mayor of the allowance of assessment was a point he would require to take time to consider. The Council certainly had no power to alter or vary any plan of procedure laid down by the Act; and as he was not clear that they could be held to have done this, he woul I reserve his decision until next week./;:

OATH AGAINST OATH. John Halliday v. Roger Donegan.—Claim, L2 ; Valance due. on spring-cart. Mr Halliday sud in May, 1872, he sold a cart, f.u' L 3 to Donegan, who gave him Ll in cash, and a verbal order on Mr Shanly for the rem tinder; but he had never yet got the money. Donegan stated he had given a written order on Shanly to Halliday, who said at the t ; me it was just as good as cash ; and he had never heard any more of the master, although frequently seeing Halliday, until he was summoned. Mr Simpson said he must give a verdict for the amount claimed, allowing execution to stand over for a week. In the meantime, search could be made in Mr Shanly's books, and if any light could he thrown on whether the order was presented or not, or allowed for in the accounts be' ween Shanly and Halliday, a re-hearing could be applied for. A SET-OFF. Halliday v. Masters.—Claim, L 3. Mr Wilson for defendant. The claim was admitted, but a set-off was put in for grazing cattle,—to a greater amount than the claim. The Magistrate, after hearing both statements, allowed the set-oft to the amount of L 3, and so squared accounts. NO SERVICE OF SUMMONS. Tn the cases of Halliday v. Wi'liam Hope Johnson, (claim, L 35 7s 9d,) and Same v. R. Denholm, (claim L 6 8s 6d,) summonses not having been served, fresh summonses were ordered to issue,.if required. In the case of Same v. Capstick, the amount sued for, 125., was paid into Court. AN ILLITERATE DEFENDANT. Halliday«. Eossiter.--Claim, Lll6 12s Id, reduced to LSO to luring it within the jurisdiction of the Court. Plaintiff handed in an I 0 U for the amount first named. On being asked to plead, Eossiter made a statement to the effect that, when Halliday was going through the Court, he asked him to sign a paper, and he did so, Halliday telling him hf required it as a matter of convenience in that proceeding. He (Possiter) could neither read or write, and Halliday did not read the document to him. Eossiter made other statements, to the eff< ct that he thought he owed the plaintiff L 6 ; but he was evidently altogether in a state of fog as +o the transactions between them. The plaintiff handed in his books, and they were inspected by the Magistrate, who advised the parties to come to some settlement; if the plaintiff would take 5s in the pound, perhaps defendant might get him the money. Plaintiff said he would willingly take this, and the understanding come to was that Eossiter should try to raise the necessary amount, by paying whicii the parties would cry " quits." NO APPEARANCE. Same v Costello.—Claim, L 7 8s 4d, ho appearance of defendant, and judgment therefore went by default. Same v. Anderson.—Claim, L 8 9s 3d. No appearance ; judgment by default. A MIXED-UP CONCERN. Same v. Eichard Herbert.—Claim, 10s, the value of a sluice-box. In this case, Jelly, a brother-in-law of Halliday, and Watson, a brother-in-law of Herbert, were owjceraed in some way with the possession

of the. sluice-box. Herbert, Watson, and Jelly appeared to tiave been mates, and'the partiou* lar reason why.Rerbert was sued was not brought out to the satisfaction of the Magistrate, who ciiamlssed'the case. During the hearing, Mr Simpson administered a strong rebuke to Herbert, who seemed inclined to think that it was not worthwhile to "kiss the Book" for 10s. He, however, explained that he merely referred to' the case being such a trivial one as not to require any statement in defence from him. A DISPUTED ACCOUNT. Same v. Jl Wellings. —Claim, L 3 Is 7d, Defendant admitted claim to extent of L2 5s 7d, but was of opinion he could not owe for the other items which went to make up the total, because, when he bought them, he had money, and it was only when he had Do money he " stuck things up." Judgment was given for amount claimed j and two months' allowed for payment* A RECEIPT AT HOME, Same v. John Chadwick.—Claim, Ls k Mr Wilson, for defendant, pleaded payment in full in 1872, to the trustees in Halliday's estate k Mr Halliday said he had been told by defen* dant that he had a receipt at home for the amount, but he (Halliday) never could get to see it. Chadwick said he never asked to see it. The receipt being now produced, judgment was therefore given for defendant, with 40a ex* penses. A. TECHNICAL AND FATAL OBJECTION* Halliday v. Arch. Blue.—Claim, L 34 19s 6d. Mr Johnston, for defendant, would plead every plea he could plead $ not indebted and general denial. The case, if gone into, would occupy the Court a long time, perhaps three hours, as he intended to dispute item by item, and he would therefore at once enter an objection against the deeds of assignment under which the plaintiff sued. The deeds were one from Messrs Cowan and Shanly, as trustees in his estate, to Halliday, and one also, in connection with his second bankruptcy, from Mr R. H. Leary, Trustee in Bankruptcy. Mr Johnston objected to them oft the ground that, first, Mr Halliday did not produce his deed of assignment in the original instance to Messrs Cowan and Shanly ; second, that the deed from Mr Leary was insufficiently stamped ; .and third, that it was not sealed. He objected also to the deed from Messrs Cowan and Shanly on the ground of insufficient stamping, but it was found fhat it bore a " fine stamp,'* and Halliday said that it had cost him L 5 already. Mr Simpson said Halliday had better take 21 nonsuit, and then take legal advice on the matter. Halliday agreed to this, and also withdrew a number of other cases set down for hearing in 'which he was plaintiff. re-Hearing. W. Reid Robertson v. G. W, Goodger.— Claim, L 5 7s, 12s of which was foregone,. re' ducing the amount to L 4 15s. Mr Johnston appeared for plaintiff, Mr Wilson for defendant. jhis was a long-standing debt, being incurred in 1808. Ro.bertson sold Goodger a mare and saddle for L2i2, of which he acknowledged receiving LlB. Goodger said he paid him Ll9, and Robertson at the time stayed in his house a week, drinking bottled ale and porter, until he had run up a score altogether of L 6. Goodger said he. then came to a settlement with him, advising him to stop drinking, and telling him he was L 3 in debt. Robertson went away apparently satisfied.—There was also a balance alleged by Robertson to be due on a ton of potatoes sold by him to Goodger ; but Goodger maintained they were "square" on this transaction, Robertson having taken out the balance, beyond a sum of L 5 given to him in a lump, in small sums and bottles of whiskey. The Magistrate, in deciding, said the alleged settlement was one the Court could take no notice of. Apparently it was a case of a man sticking at a public-house and drinking out bia balance. It was a set-off that could not have been received in Court. Judgment therefore would not be reversed, but stand as before for plaintiff. SLAUGHTERING LICENSE. John Perriam, Lowburn : granted. TEMPORARY EXTENSION. Robert Kidd was granted leave to keßp his house open on Wednesday night beyond the usual hour.

Educational Advantages.— The Danbury News tells of an Irishman who found a Government blanket recently, and rolling it up put it under his arm and walked off, saying : " Yis, that's moine—TJ for Pathrick, and S for M'Carty ; be me sowl, but this larnin' ia a foine thing, as me fayther would say: for if I hadn't an edication I wouldn't have been afther findin' me blanket." The inhabitants of the Cromwell district are sometimes puzzled to know which is the best) and cheaoest establishment to purchase their supplies of drapery and clothing at. They should no longer remain in doubt on that score. If they will only pay one visit to W. Talboys' London House, they will discover for themselves that it is not only the cheapest but the best store at which to deal for these articles, Mr Talboys has made nrrangements to import his stock direct from the Home markets, and the public can rest assured that everything will be sold by him at an advance only sufficient to repay the original cost, and return a fair percentage on the outlay. Every article in Mr Talboys' establishment is marked in plain figures, from which no abatement is ever made.—[AuvT.] ffolloway's Pills,— Stomach, Liver and Bowels. —ln all painful affections of the stomach and disordered actions of the liver and bowels, one single trial of these Pills will demonstrate that they possess regulating and renovating powers iu a high degree. Thev speedily restore the appetite, lessen the unpleasant distention of the abdomen, and so prevent inflammation of the bowels and other serious abdominal ailments. Holloway's Pills afford the greatest comfort to the dyspeptic invalid, without harrassing or weakening the most sensitive constitution, or interfering materially with the studies, pleasures, or pursuits of the person using them. The simplicity and efficacy of this treatment has evoked the gratitude of all classes in both hemispheres, and commanded a sale for these purifying PUla unprecedented in modirad history.