MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 470, 31 March 1909, Page 11

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before Mr. W. G. Riddeli, S.M.) A TRIVIAL THEFT. A youthful-looking seaman named Harry Stevons' entering a plea of guilty : to a charge of theft of a water jug, valued at Is., the property of Robert Dwyer, hotclkeeper. Station-Sergeant Darby -informed tho Court that Stevens went into Mr. Dryer's hotel, and after he left a water bottle :was missed off tho counter. r ,.' , His Worship convicted ■ and : discharged accused, and ordered him to pay for the value of tho jug and to pay costs 3s. ALLEGED BREAKING AND ENTERING. A remand to, this morning was granted in tho case-of -a young--maiv named Richard Lynch, charge"d with that on March 29, at Berhampore, he did break and enter the dwelling of Benjamin Campbell by day, and steal therefrom a watch and chain, a ring, and a pendant of a total value of JCIO 10s. insobriety;. "This woman does not appear to make any effort to reform-she has a long i list of grovious convictions against her." Such was bta-tion-Sergeant Darby's summing up;of the case of a middle-aged woman named Caroline Smydth, charged with habitual' drunkenness. His Worship imposed a sentence of two months imprisonment. ■ Bartholomew Mahoney arid David Patience, both .charged with insobriety,' were convicted, and fined 10s„ with the alternative of 18 hours imprisonment. • • Daniel Griffen, who had been remanded for treatment, was also charged with insobrietv. Mr. Cook, for..defendant,, said his client had been 30 years in New Zealand and had never given tho ( police any tronble until he came down to town from Ohakuhe, where he had been working. His Worship entered a conviction, and ordered defendant to pay 17s. Gd. expenses incurred. Two first offenders were each convicted and fined 'ss. ■': • RESERVED JUDGMENT. An interesting reserved decision was given by Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M., in tho case H. Price and Co., merchants (Mr. Arnold), v. Geo. Robert Hoskirig (Mr. Buddie). Plaintiff obtained a judgment in the S.M. Court, Wellington, against the firm of Franklyn and Hosking for tho payment of .£79 15s. 4d. A sum of .£sl 9s. 3d. had since been paid into Court as tho net proceeds of a distress warrant issued against the goods of the partnership firm, leaving a balance of £28 18s. Id. still owing. Defendant was a partner in the said firm, and there were now no assets of the firm to satisfy the unpaid balance of the judgment. Plaintiff claimed a declaration that defendant was jointly and severally liable for the debts of the firra, 4 and that he might bo ordered to pay to plaintiff tho sum of .£2B 18s. Id., balance owing under the judgment, with interest. Counsel for tho defence did not deny the liability, but counsel for plaintiff contended that it was necessary for him to take, the present, action in order to proceed against the defendant. Defendant asked for a non-suit on the ground this action was unnecessary, inasmuch as plaintiff might issue execution on his former judgment, and. that ho could get nothing more on a judgment under,the present action than under the former one. After referring to three cases bearing on tho point, his Worship said that ho did not consider that plaintiff ought to be allowed to bring the action 'unless he could show that otherwise ho could riot obtain justice. A judgment in this Court was final between tho parties, the only remedy being that provided by tho statute The plaintiff was not without romedy here—Section 112 of the Magistrate's. Court Act, 1908, required the magistrate to issue warrants of distress at the request' of the party prosecuting tho judgment. Execution could have issued against the'defendant. Suits should not be multiplied unless, all having been done that could, be dons, the fruits of a judgment cannot be otherwise obtained. Plain-' tiff would be non-suited, with costs ,£2 2s.