RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, CLYDE.

Dunstan Times, Issue 828, 1 March 1878, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, CLYDE.

Monday, February, 28 1878. (Before W, L. Simpson, Esq., R.M.) Messrs T. Hawthorne, J. Cox, A. Moore, and J. Holt wore summoned by the police under the Town and' County Police Ordinance for not having their outside lamps at their respective hotels alight, A fine of Is. and costs was recorded against each. .1. Holt was summoned for unnecessary delay in replying to a knock at the door for admittance by -the police. The Sereeant of Police having slated the circumstances of the case : Mr Holt said he opened the door "immediately he heard the knocking ; that at the time the Sergeant knocked at the door he was in the back parlor with some boarders, and tbslt he was not aware it was the police who was knocking. Dismissed C.T. Marie v. .1. Holt. Claim—Llo, for damages to his property through being flooded from defendant’s property adjoining. The plaintiff having given evidence that a house of his, also some timber and corrugated iron s’acked on the ground, was damaged by being flooded, called upon T. H. Dunn, who deposed that ho had frequently seen the plaintiff’s land flooded with water, surrounding the house, and partially covering the iron and timber. He failed, however, in proving auy damage, and though he swore that through the iron being under the water he had been nuahlo to effect a sale of it, ho yet was unable to give the name of any person with whom he had treated for the purchase of it. Ho further swore that the copy of notice of damages attached to the plaint was a duplicate of the one served on defendant. Mr Holt and Mr Hall, for the dofencp, while admitting that water gathered on the

plaintiff’s land, yet doubted if itever roadie J the iron leave alone covered it. Mr Holt also produced the notice of damage served on him by the plaintiff,' the which it appeared was not a duplicate of the one attached to the plaint, the most material point, the amount of damages, LlO being omitted. The Bench in giving judgment said—The 'fact of plaintiff’s land being flooded would 'carry damages, but the damage to the timber and iron had not been proved ; he could not compliment plaintiff’s witness on his evidence, which was not what it should have been. Judgment for plaintiff, 305., and'Codts. Gilchrist v. M‘Nally. Claim, L 9 wages. Defendant explained the liability was incurred by him as Manager of a mining partnership out of which he had lately sold, and asked for an adjournment of 14 days ; in the meantime he would endeavor to obtain a settlement. Adjourned accordingly. Struck'out. Thompson v. Drunmiy, and same v. Hastedt. No appearance