MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3035, 23 March 1917, Page 9

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

• . POLICE OASES. Mr. :W. 6. .Riddell, S.M., presided over yesterday's sitting of the Magistrate's Court. : /Vyilliam Wilson was fined 20s. upon his eighth conviction for insobriety within the space of six months. He was. ordered to be prohibited from obtaining liquor for one year. . Joseph Whitworth was convicted of possessing insufficient, lawful means of support. 'He was ordered to com© up for sentence when called upon. Oliver Chittle appeared on a charge similar to that preferred against "Whitworth, and was dealt with in the same way. ' / ' James O'Connell was remanded for a week on a charge of stealing a-pile-driver;- Inspector Marsack said that there was a possibility- of tho matter being settled by a civil aotion, and it was desired to mako .further inquiries. Thomas Hart, a seaman, was charged with having committed an indecent act in Lambton Quay. ' He was convicted and fined £3, with the alternative of spending a fortnight in gaol. CIVIL ACTIONS./ Judgment by default of defendants was given for the plaintiffs in tho fol-' lowing cases:— ' _ Wellington Operative ' Butchers' Union v. Edward Fleet, £1 65., and costs 55.; T. and W: Young v. H. H. Adamson, £12 17s. 3d., costs £2 19s. 6d.j L. Taylor v. A. .W. Innes, £41 13s. Bd., costs £3 45.; A. Hatrick and Co., Ltd., v.. J. H. Ormrod, £16 Is. 2d., costs £1 10b. 6d • Commercial Agency, Ltd., v. Richard Ridsdale, £8 125., costs £1 3s. 6d.; Commercial Agency and Thomas Horton, Ltd., t. F. Morley, £23 35., costs £2 145.; J. ■B. MacEwari and Co., Ltd., v. James Orr, £17 13s. 9d., costs £1 12s. 6d.; B. Reginald Collins and Co., Ltd., v. Harry Haye, £5 14s.' 6d., costs £1 6s. 6d.; Carlylb Beatson Robertson and J. S. Watchorn and Co., Ltd,, v. Frank Ofsoski, £2 17s. lid., costs 10s.; Burch and Co., Ltd., v. A. Bradley and Sons, £19 13s. 6d., costs £1 10s. 6d. : United Farmers' Co-op. Association, Ltd., v. J. 6. Stevens, £3 18s., costs 10s.; B. Reynolds arid Co., Ltd., v. Robertson arid'C'o.j £59 16s. 2d., costs £1 10s.; A. R. Hislop, Ltd., v. J. H. Ormrod, £1 125., costs 65.; United Farmers' Co-op. Association, Ltd., v. P.'H. Te Taipua,: 13s. costs; same v. P. Spiers, £15 Bs. 2d. i costs £1 18s. 6d.; Mrs. E. ,M. M'Kenzio v. Percy Bathurst, 155., costs. sb. ; Arthur M. Holmes v. Moore's Vivifio Co., Ltd., £78 10s. 6d., costs £4 9s.'; Commercial Agency, Ltd;, and Haswell Bros., v. Thomas Young, £3 14s. 9d., costs 10s.; same v.' J. W. Proctor, £3 13s. 4d., costs 135.; same v. W. Bolstad, £213s .4d., costs 10s.; same v. L. Ferries, Is., costs 75.; Levin and Co., Ltd., v. W. A. Grantham, £1 ss. 6d., costs 55.; C. and A. Odlin Co., Ltd., v. Frano Ales. Shaw, Carlisle and Co., £22 ss. Bd., costs £2 145.; Chaß.-Begg and Co., Ltd., v. Francis Edward ,Lamb, £17 15s.,_ costs £3 15s. (also possession of a piano); Vacuum Oil Co., Ltd., v. L. Maughan, £21, costs £2 :145.; Levin and Co., Ltd., v. Charles Cundy, £4 165., costs 145..

Judgment summons cases_ were'dealt with as under:—James VipondMilican was ordered to pay Julia, Gini £7 19s. 6d. by monthly instalments of £1; John Reginald Welsby was ordered to pay George Barnes Walker, £1 18s. by March 31, or servo twenty-four hours in gaol. DEFENDED OASES. A dispute concerning; a .consignment of bananas was heard. ; Griffiths and Co., merchants, of Wellington, claimed from Charles'Schlitzkus tha sum of £7 2s. 6d., the price of fifteen oases of bananas sold and delivered to tho defendant. It was shown that tho bananas • arrived in bad condition, and the main question at issua was as to responsibility for the damage. After hearing the evidence and short legal argument tho Magistrate intimated that he would take time to consider his decision. Mr._ E. M. Sladden appeared for tho plaintiff and Mr. ,Luko for the defendant. _ Fulton and Co. (Wellington) claimcd from North and Cato (Nelson) tho sum of £40 9s. 4d. for tho supply of motor spirit. The case arose in connection with a motor servico between Nelson and Blenheim. It was alleged by tho plaintiffs that. North and Cato were partners in business. Cate's defence was that he was not a partner, and that ho ran the Blenheim half of the service separately. North did not appear. Mr. D. R. Hoggard represented the plaintiff, and Mr. D. M. Findlay the defendant Cate. His Worship found that there was no suoh partnership firm as North and Cate, but that North and Cate were individually carrying on different parts of the motor run. The case was dismissed, and plaintiff was ordered to pay defendant Cato's costs.