MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1155, 16 June 1911, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

•» (Before Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.) CIVIL BUSINESS. A DEAL IN HARDWOODS. Rc-ervod judgment was delivered in llii I ease in which John 31' Lean and Son? I contractor:.-, of Wellington, sued Davk Andrews, contractor, also of Wellington to recover the sum of S:\V,\ -Is. 2d., balanci alleged to be due to plainlilYs on accouni of twelve h-onlmrk piles sold and deliver oil to defoudniit. II r. C. B. Morison an pcared for plaintiffs and Mr. A. Blaii for defendant. The case for the plaintiff was that de fondant wishrd to borrow twelve pile: in connect ion ■with n bridge contract, bn plaintiffs had declined to lend tho piles and eventually defendant had bought twelve 60ft. piles at a charge, of 3s. Gd per foot. Plaiutiffs admitted that do fondant had left twelve 55ft. piles on .th< reclaimed land near the dock, but denied that those were to ho accepted in exchange. Defendant had been sent ar account for the cost of the 00ft. piles, .£122 Gs. Gd., less a credit item of JCi 2s. 3d. For (lie defence it was contended thai plaintiff's clerk had agreed with defendant that the, 60ft. piles should be replaced by defendant delivering twelve 55ft. piles, which arrived in a shipment of hardwood about a fortnight after defendant had secured the original piles from plaintiffs. It was further contended that these pile; had been delivered and some of them used by plaintiffs. Defendants, therefor< considered that his only liability wa; for the difference, in length of the piles, at as. tid. per foot. Tho case cama on for hearing in Wellington last November, and was adjourned sine die to enable tho evidence of a witness, at Otira tunnel, to be obtained. Tho evidence was completed last week. In giving judgment, the magistrate said: "It is very clear (even admitted) that the defendant purchased the piles, the price of which are sued for. It is also clear that he received periodical accounts from tho plaintiffs for the price of same. The evidence of plaintiffs, and of their clerk, convinces me that no piles were taken by them in return for those purchased, and that the piles placed on Hie reclamation by defendant were placed there at his own risk." Judsmeut was accordingly given for the plaintiffs for the amount claimed with the usual costs. NON-SUITED. Annie Dutton, cook, of Wellington, sued L. M'Miller, dressmaker, of Wellington, to recover the sum c.t -S2 !)s. Sd.. alleging that, in December, 19)0, she had employ, ed the defendant to make her a dress, and had supplied tho material therefor, and that, the dress was a misfit, and, further, that plaintiff refused to alter it. Wherefor plaintiff sought to recover value of the material, 19s. Sd.. and the price paid for making up £\ 10s. Mr. P. W. Jackson appeared for plaintiff, and .Air. F. P. Kelly for defendant. After calling three witnesses, Mr. Jackson asked to be allowed to accept a nonsuit, as it was a case where ho would like to obtain expert evident , ?. The nonsuit was agreed to, defendant being allowed £1 Is. cosis. UNDEFENDED CASES. Judgment by default was given for plaintiffs in the following undefended cases—Barber and Co. v. Airs. Alice R. Shoch, 12s. Bd.. coits as.; Kirkcaldie and Stains, Ltd v. Mrs. Jack J. Ward, .f3 11s., costs 175.; same v. Thomas- Hill and Mrs. ! Hill, M Gs. Sd., costs 55.; Gear Meat Co., Ltd. v. George Peterson. .El. costs 55.; John George Raine v. Mont Dilly, .I'M 2s. i)d., costs .El 10s. Gd.; Hirst and Co. v. Grant AVestoby. ,C 3 Us. 3d.,.costs 10s.; Commercial Agency, Ltd., assignee, and London "Times," assignor v. Mrs. Agues J. Oliver, .513 155.. costs .£1 10s. Gd.; Commercial Agency, Ltd., assignee, and Abbott, Drum and Co., assignor v. Mrs. A. Jeffrey, .£26 13s. 7d., costs .£2 Us.; R. Hudson and Co.. Ltd. v. Mrs. M. Clcary, .£2 125.. costs Kk; G. and C. Aldous v. I Alfred. Davics, .£2 os. -Id., costs .CI 155.; Vacuum Oil Co., Proprietary, Ltd. v. Joseph Ehrmau. costs 75.; same v. Arthur Reade, ,£2 12s. ,ld., costs 10s.: Commercial Agency, Ltd.. assignee. and AVv Wiggiis, Ltd., assignor v. Gill Bros., ,{9 10s., costs M 3s. fid.; Waiter Scott Bedford v. William M'Jjiickic, J:3, co«ts 10s.; Francis Edward Green v. Edward William Oliver, JZI 7s. id., costs 105..,- Thomas Inglis v. Charles Young, .£25 11s. Gd., costs .C 2 Us. JUDGMENT SUMMONSES. William AVilson wr.s ordered to pay ,£2O os. Gd. to F. E. Petherick on or before June 20. in default U days 'imprisonment. N.O order was inaele in the following cnsßs:—Frederick AAin. Petherick v. Alfred Allan Wilton, a claim for Jsl lGs. 2d.; same v. Alexander Lowe, a claim for £2 3s. 10d. POLICE CASES, DIRECTOR. AND SHAREHOLDER, (Before Mr. AY. G. Rieldell, S.M.) On the information of Samuel Salek, director of the Globe Printing Co., John Fischer, a shareholder and an ■employee of fho same company,'was charged with assaulting the informant. Mr. O. Ji;ere appeared for the informant and Mr. T. W. Hislop for the defendant. It appeared from the evidence that the action was the result Df an occurrence outside the Globe Printing Office, "Willis Street, on Wednesday afternoon. Mr. Hislop said that tnc assault was admitted, but defendant pleaded provocation. No evidence was called for the defence, but the informant was cross-examined with a view to showing (hat defendant h?.d boon provoked on account of certain business happenings.

At the conclusion of the evidence. Mr. Bcere asked that defendant be bound over to k?ei) the pence, under Section 20 of the Justices of the Peace Act.

The Magistrate was not prepared lo grant Mr. Becro's request, but- decided that defendant must be convicted. A fine of 40s. was imposed, with witnesses' ex])t!iis?s, 6:i. DiM'iHilt was fixed at seven days' imprisonment. OTHER CASES. . Gustnv Hirschberg pleaded not guilty to a charge of being anidle and disorderly person, with insufficient lawful means of support, but the evidoiico was held is be against him. As he had not previously been before tho Court on a similar charge, the Magistrate decided to give him p. chance, and he was convicted and ordered to come up for sentence, when called on, a condition being that he returned to work.

Mary Lee was convicted and discharged for drunkenness and, for procuring liquor during the currency of a prohibition order in force against her, she was fined Ms., with the alternative of It dr.vs imprisonment. Two tirst-olfending inebriates, who did not appear, were ordered to forfeit their bail (10s. each), or to undr-rgo il hours' imprisonment:. Two other first offenders were fined ss. each, with the ontion of 2t hours imprisonment, ond another was convicted and discharged.