MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 437, 20 February 1909, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

POLICE CASES. (Beforo Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M.) r A NEW ARRIVAL IN TROUBLE. • "I had, only, been in .Wellington/,eight hours when I was arrested" .was the state- [ ment made by I'rederick Anderson, _: who pleaded not guilty to a charge of stealing 50 initial: letter tie. pins, valued at £2 105.,, the property of James. Adams. ... Evidence showed that accused was seen in the/.vicinity, of Mr. Adams's shop in Willis Street, and, after the'pins had been missed, they were found on accused. Accused informed the Court that' he' had. only from London by the Mamari.on January 22. ' He came ashore when the vessel arrived, commenced drinking, and purr cha^ed ; the ,'pins from 4 .man in the 'street}' giving him 2Jd. for them. His Worship remarked that this story was an old one, and had been told in the Court dozens 'of times, i.but rarely, believed. Accused would bo sentenced to three weeks'' imprisonment. . • "• MEAN THEFT FROM A MATE. Alfred Olund pleaded guilty to a'charge of : having at tho Upper Hutt, on February 18, committed: theft of £5, the property, of Walter Bengo.. . _ Sub-Inspector Phair stated that /accused: and Benge had been, living together in a whare atMungaroa.- Mr.: Benge left the* £5 in tho pockets of his clothes, when.ho went out on; and: on returning to the 'wharei the money, was missing. Accusedwas suspected, but denied .'having' taken;' the money. When : he - was .'searched,: however, £4 lis, 9d. was found on him, and he ad: mittcd having .taken tho money. V:

/. His Worship::characterised the .theft of; a ■mate's - money as a mean ■ action.;. Accused would be convicted and fined 40s. and; costs Bsi, arid'ordered to refund the £5, in default 14 days' imprisonment. .■ : OBSCENE LANGUAGE : . John. Lai.ilaw, alias Walling, pleaded not 'guilty 'to a charge of having, used, obscene , languageinWillis. Street.. : .After . hearing evidence.'at' considerable length,, his. Worship . entered a conviction and fitio of £5. and costs 14s. Mr. Herdman appeared for the defenco. : 'f'-;■: \ : ABSENT WITHOUT LEAVE. -'■'A. seamanv belonging to- the 'steamer.Tiirakiria,: Thomas Beauregard Williams, pleaded guilty to' a" charge of absenting himself from; the vessel • yithout, leavej and. was .convicted arid {ordered to forfeit two days' pay, also .to bo placed on board! the vessel. Defendant was also mulcted in 7s. costs.' • INSOBRIETY; , Carolino Smydth,: deemed-to ,be : ual;,drurikaM;:-wa6; sentenced to one: months imprisonment. Michael, Fahey, charged with having: been, found in a state of helpless ;drunkeriness : at- Masterton on February : 12, ; ,was convicted . and ordered to pay 17s. 6d. to. cover, expenses 'incurred, in default-three ;days'-. imprisonment.:,... Two .'first.offenders iwere- fined. ss; each; and one was convicted and discharged. : V;vi.':'?;

A BY-LAW CASE. ■ Brown Bros., who' did not appear, . were ysi- ior Having }left"(a' vehicle:: standing i. in (Tinakori: Road, 'without' any.hors6beirigharnessedto.it.

RESERVED DECISIONS. . A CHEESE TRANSACTION. -I'-'Resorved 1 judgment' was''given- by . Dr. A.' ?M'Arthur,/5.M.,; in'.the. civil .action Thompson, • leaser.'* Ramsay Proprietary,; Limited i(Mr. Young), v. M'Ewan and Co., Limited (Mr. Dalziell), a claim of.' £65;'.7s. v . '5d.,; iir respectof l 6o' cases of/cheese sold by plain-' tiffs' to defendants, .and warranted .to bo matured, : irrespective of grade, / and ;to be not less than six months old. After , deajiirig .at' some length with the evidence, his Worship, commented on a nonsuit point raised' by counsel for tliedefenco, who-con-tended that. the ; olaim; was;, made ,/in / respect: of: damage' said to' havo been ■, discovered in )Melbourne,: whence the ■ cheese, was,,shipped: ■Gouasel /held that.\plaintiff. must prove, his* case.. 'Tho oontract was for checso to be.dejlirered at Wellington : on tho boat for.: Mel-, 'bourns.;:'lt' was not a., term.. of /the.contract, that, the cheese was to be sold in tho Melbourne market,'/nor 7 ' was'it - a term /of * the /contract that':it was.'ixi "be '.shipped to Mel.bourrie.', . Delivery'/was to be at tho boat in •Wellington. Counsel- .urged lfurther that.de-. no notice of any contract on Account 7 of which plaintiff could claim, special: 'damage. Inspection should have taken place' ait the ,-place of . delivery, and not .delayed .untii rarrival- in Melbourne. There .were no . latent/ defects in tho cheese. : /.-. ' ' ; : •. ■

:His;- Worshipconsidered ; that ■ /'plaintiffs, .'having taken delivery of: the, goods yat, Wellington, ought there and' then to havo inspected them, and, if riot satisfied, ..to : have. 'rejected.'them.:.lnstead of that, they :didn6t 'inspect ' the . goods, .but. exercised: rights Jof 'ownership over them, .. They'might,, if they chose; have sold, them then;, and there, or, shipped , them to any. place ' they ■ chose''. / The' wantof inspection iwas .their, own - neglect. The .buyer's; opportunity of inspection,' prima facie,Varose, at -the place of delivery, but it: need riot necessarily be there if the oontract expressly _ or. .. implicitly • .provided . that ■ '.the time-for : inspectiori 'should ibo delivery j;. and that'' the'' place, 'of . inspection should be different from that ofdelivery. 'Certainly, if...the;defect;waß a latent : one, .not discoverable at the place of dojivery, tho contraot '.ifould. be construed, as", if ( the place ■'in which' 'an "effective inspectiori ..were.... first' 'possible, ;were the place, of, inspection men-, tioned in the', contract. . An effective inspection could; have taken place at Wellington, and his Worship could see no. reason why the placo of inspection 1 in the ' preserit case should ".be;: different from : that':, of . 'delivery. There were no latent in the goods; •

In .his Worship's opinion, Wellington was where the .inspection should have taken place, and ! the goods rejected, - and not. after'the, goods had been sold to a subpurchaser at Melbourne. ; Again, the: want of: notice givon to defendants raised a . strong' presumption that the goods -at v the time of sale .'corresponded with - . the. warranty, and c oalled' for, ; strict ; , proof .of '/.the breach:, of. warranty.";' Such proof had-'not been adduoed; In fact, there was no proof ;of tho breach; of warranty .except the evidence of We witness'as to 10 cases, and his : evidence - was /overbalanced .'by: .that ;.'of the: .'witnesses for tho defence. In.the opinion. of. the Court, both on law and in facts, : plaintiffs could not-succeed..; Judgment would bo for defendants. . ■

PLTJMBER AND CONTRACTOR; •Reserved judgment was also given by. Dr. 51' Arthur in tno caso Cbas. \V. Martin,, plumber (Mr W H D Ball), v. R. A. : Wakelin and Som contractors (Mr/ Findlay), a claim, for: the recovery of £79 10s. lid., .balance alleged to Lo due for plumbing; work. There were 23 items in the statement of account, :of which" 16 were admitted, leaving 7in. dispute.) Defendants counter-claimed for £8, of which £5 .was abandoned; ; leaving £3 for the value of a water meter, , which 'sum : his Worship thought should . be, allowed defendants. The Court dealt seriatim with the different claims, and after stating the deductions, gave judgment for plaintiff for £21 14s. 4d. Costs £4 4s. were allowed on the claim, and £1 10s. on tlio counterclaim. . MOUNT COOK POLICE , COURT. , At the Mount Cook , Police Court yesterday, beforo Mr. T. S. Lambert, J.Pi, John Golding, an old .man, pleaded guilty to insobriety. Accused begged for ' another chance, and, having been given some admonition, he was convicted and discharged. John.. Mansfield, ■ whoso case was .' identical with -!the preceding one, was convicted. and discharged. Frederick Barton was charged with,'being drunk.and also with creating: ascene by disorderly conduct in the street. He was fined or ttoeo days' imprisonment.