RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3001, 7 February 1881, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

i MONDAY, FEBRUARY 7. (Before H. Eyre Kenny, Esq., K.M.) , DRUNKENNESS. Robert Ferguson, charged with drunkenness, pleaded guilty, and was fined 5s and costs, or 48 hours imprisonment with hard labor. Bruce Mackintosh, charged .with the same offence, was fined 5s and costs, or 48 hours imprisonment with hard labor. civil cases. E. v. William Smith.—Claim. £44 19s 4d. Judgment for plaintiff with costs. William Baldwin v. John Slafer.— Claim £1 10s. Judgment for plaintiff with cost?. John Jeffares v. Meihani Takeho.— Claim £20 3a 4d. Judgment for plaintiff with costs, money to be paid within a month, JUDGMENT SUMMONS. The Napier Grammar School Company v. J. Harding.—Mr Carlile for the plaintiffs, and Mr Cornford for defendant. Mr Cornford said he would ask that Mr Carlile produce his warrant under the seal of the company. Mr Garble submitted that that did not apply to the R.M. Court. His Worship said Mr Cornford was quite right in law, and if he pressed the matter be would allow his objection. The case was then adjourned for an hour to enable Mr Carlile to produce bis warrant. The case against R. Harding was adjourned on the same ground. Ruddick v. Brighousc.—Mr Lascelles for plaintiff, and Mr Lee for defendant. Claim for £10 Is for goods sold.—The plaintiff said he sold and delivered the goods charged. He delivered them to Mr Brighoiise'a man. There was no arrangement made about the return of them. The man brought some things back the same day, and said he wanted to leave them till morning. The things were put in the wash-house. No one delivered them to him or counted them over. Next morning defendant came and said he wanted to return some liquors to him. He (plaintiff) said he would receive no liquors back. The defendant then offered them to the waiter, but he would not receive them. The goods are still in the wash-house. Cross-examined by Mr Lee; The arrangement about the liquors was made on the 17th. The defendant's m?n packed them up. Brigbouse was there the night before. He did not arrange with defendant to take back what was not sold. Defendant was to pay for the goods on the day they were taken. Nothing was said about his being paid for what was sold. He received no list of goods from defendant. He received, no memo, of goods returned His (plaintiff's) man made a list. He never went through the liquors with defendant. He did not tell defendant's man that he would take back what was left. He never sent a bill of items before the summons.—B. Harvey said he was waiter to Mr Ruddick. He saw the liquor defendant brought back. Defendant wanted him to receive it, but he refused. The goo'ls were unpacked in the wash-house. Defendant Baid, " take tally of the goods," but Mr Ruddick told him to have nothing to do with them.— Cross-examined by Mr Lee : The goods were brought on the afternoon of the day after the races. The day after he made a tally of the goods by Mr Ruddick's orders. The goods were lying about and some of the bottles were broached — Re-examined by Mr Lascelles : Mr Ruddick said he could not have the bottles lying about the washhouse, and told me to make a list of the

goods.—This closed the case for the plaintiff.—Mr Brighouse, examined, Baid he remembered getting wine and spirits from the plaintiff on the day before the races. The arrangement was that he could have the liquors at the same price and on the same terms as he could get them from Messrs Robjohns and Co. He was managing the booth at the races for Mr Adair, of Kaikora. It was arranged to return what was not sold. He was buying for Adair. After tbe races the goods not used were sent back by three of his men. He saw plaintiff the next morning. He and plaintiff went to tbe wash-house and counted the goods sent back. The goods were in the cases. He counted the goods aloud. Plaintiff said," You haven't sold mucb." I said, "No." Plaintiff said, "I shalt charge you £5 for use of them. He (defendant) said he couldn't afford it, as he had not sold mucb. Plaintiff then said, "I will make it worse for you."—By the Bench : I didn't tell plaintiff I was selling for Adair.—Examination continued : Plaintiff looked at the goods and said he supposed they were all right. He (defendant) locked them up, nnd sent the key to Ruddick. He had received no demand for money except the summons. — Cross-examined by Mr Lascelles : He wrote Ruddick a letter. He had heard that Ruddick had been speaking against him. The waiter was at the wash-house when the goods were counted. The waiter counted them again. He didn't ask for any receipt for the goods. They came to no adjustment of the account. He was engaged by Mr Adair to manage the booths. He and Adair were to divide the profit equally. Adair had a permit to sell from Napier. Plaintiff would have taken the goods back if he (defendant) would have paid £5. The waiter did not refuse to take tally ot the goods.—Arthur Chalmers, book-keeper to Mr Brighouse, was then examined, and corroborated the defendant's evi- | dence.— His Worship said the evidence was very contradictory, and he would reserve judgment until Wednesday morning.

A number of other cases were set down for hearing and the Court was still sitting when our report left.