RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. CLYDE.

Dunstan Times, Issue 655, 6 November 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. CLYDE.

—o Friday, October 30 th. Before B. Naylor, Esq., J, P.) Police v. Robert Charters alias Gardner. —Drunk and disorderly. Fined 20s, in default 43 hours’ imprisonment. Do. v. Gunny Woodbnrn, for a like offence, was mulcted in a similar penalty. The latter alternative in each case being taken. Do. v. Do.—Charged with assaulting and resisting the Police in the execution of their duty was fined L 5, in default one month’s imprisonment. Thursday, Nov. sth. (Before W. L. Simpson, Esq., R.M.) Thomson v. Patterson.- Claim, L 27 16?, for medical attendance on defendant and his family. Defendant’s evidence was taken in Dunedin, in which indebtedness in only L2 was admitted, the defendant accounting for the balance by the sale of some bricks to plaintiff. Evidence was taken regarding the bricks, from which it was clicito I that ho did sell 3000 bricks to the plaintiff; but that afterwards ho resold them to a second person.

Mr F, J. Wilson who appeared for defendant, raised a non suit point on the ground that the plaintiff had not, in accordance with the Medical Practitioners’ Act, 1872, given proof that he was a duly qualified medical practitioner, and consequently unable to sue. Dr Thomson said he was registered both at Home aud in Dunedin, and that if his name was not gazetted that was no fault of his, and asked for an adjournment to produce his certificates of registration. The Magistrate said he was not prepared to say whether the point raised was a good one, as it was purely an oversight oh the part of the plaintiff to produce proof of registration ; and further, he did not know, as the point was a technical one, whether with a view of preventing further litigation he would not be justified in oveimling tho point. He, however, would grant an adjournment till Saturday, and in the meantime he would look up authorities on the question ; in conclusion he would say that if the non-suit was not allowed judgment would he for plaintiff, on the merits of the caae -