Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

This Day. (Before A. Chetham-Strode, Esq., E. M.) DRU.NK AND DISORDERLY. Annie Dunbar, for disorderly conduct, was sentenced to be imprisoned for fourteen days, she having been convicted thirty-three times previously. —Christina Lawson, for drunkenness, was fined 10s, or, in default, twentyfour hours’ imprisonment —Peter cherry was charged by Warder Ferguson, of the Gaol, with behaving in a disorderly manner, calculated to cause a breach of the peace. The Warder stated that he had charge of Sullivan, who was outside doing some work, and that the accused came out on the footpath, and used such abusive language as to excite the prisoner to such an extent as to render it necessary to take him inside the gaol. A crowd was gathering round, and another warder was called to take the accused into custody. Mr Ward endeavored to excuse the prisoner, on account of the character of Sullivan. The Magistrate, addressing the prisoner, said : Sullivan is bad enough—we all know that; but instead of your having such a determined “ down ” upon him, you ought to sympathise with him, for your character is as black as it can be. “Peter Sherry” is a household word in this Court, and even in Tasmania before you came here. Yon are a pretty fellow to call out to Sullivan, You are the last man who should upbraid him. You know that. I consider this a very serious offence, endeavoring to excite a man in custody to such an extent that the constable could hardly hold him. I have had so many complaints of a similar character that I must put a stop to it. —The prisoner was fined L 5, or, in default, to be imprisoned.

Civil Cases,

Crone v. Hare.—This case, which was adjourned from last Friday, on the application of Mr Barton, on account of the cross-swear-ing that took place, was again called. It was a claim of Ll7 ss, balance of account, and an I 0 U for L2O was put in evidence, which Hare declared last week he never signed. Mr Barton said the facta were, that flare at

one time was landlord and owner of Crone’s shop, and the hotel, which stood on the ground. Hare dealt with Crone for groceries, paying him the balance, if any, or Crone paying him, as it happened. Hare sold his interest in the premises to Lawson, for whom Douglas was agent ; and on a certain day, Messrs Douglas and Lawson called ou Crone for the back rent. He refused to pay, on the ground that he had a cross account. Hare was sent for, and the account was settled by Crone paying back rent, and Hare signing the document now in Court. The body of the document was written by Crone, and the signature was Hare’s. When the facts were brought to Hare’s recollection, he admitted them, and it was agreed between the parties that Hare should pay the amount claimed, with all the legal expenses. MiBarton believed there was no intention to commit wilful and corrupt perjury. Mr Harris said what Mr Barton had said was substantially correct, but although Hare, in consequence of two witnesses saying they saw him sign the document, admitted having done so, he had no recollection of it. Mr Barton applied for the full amount of costs incurred in the action. Mr Harris objected; and the Magistrate said he could, not award more than the costs prescribed by law. Mr Barton asked for a non-suit, in order to sue for the full amount agreed upon. The plaintiff was thtr f re non-suited.

Carroll ▼. Daisey.—A claim for L 7 15s, of which L 5 10s was paid. The case was undefended, and Judgment was given for the plaintiff, by default, for 11s, less 16s 6d deducted for drinks, and 17s fid for interest.

Gunn v. Maitland.—A claim for Lls 6s Bd, the balance of account for work done in building a conservatory and doing other work at his station. Mr Harris for the plaintiff, and M r Kenyon for the defendant. The account included a great number of items, many of which were disputed, and a damaged saddle and bridle were made a setoff?—Mr Clayton, builder, said the arrangement between Messrs Mail land and Gunn had nothing whatever to do with a contract that he himself had had with Mr Maitland. He saw Gunn start on horseback from Mr Maitland’s station, on one of Mr Maitland’s horses, and saw him return walking across the plain, about three miles off the station. He did not walk quite so confidently' as he himself should have done. He saw the saddle and bridle afterwards. —In reference to the set-off, the plaintiff said Mr Maitland lent him a horse to go to Mount Ida, which swerved, and, as he could not ride well, he was thrown, and the horse got away. In consequence his back was hurt, which at counted tor his unsteady v alking The defence was that time were discrepancies in the acc. nuts rendered : that the contract had been entered into, and was part of Clayton’s contract : that part of the work charged was not done, and that through various reductions in different items charged, the plaintiff was over paid. Mr D. Ross said he was architect for the building. The contract did not in the first instance include the conservatory. He knew of no other contractor than Mr Clayton. In cross-examination Mr Ross said that Maitland and Gunn called at his office, and he gave him instructions iu the matter. The sum agreed upon was Lfio. The defendant said he made no contract with Gunn. He left the contracts to Mr Ross. Mr Kenyon examined the defendant at some length on the various items, and at length applied for an adjournment to enable Mr Kenyon to produce his books. Mr Harris objected, as Mr Maitland bad had plenty of opportunity to bring his books down if they were necessary to his case. Several witnesses were examined to prove the prices of labor, and other expences of the country. Verdict for the plaintiff, L 9 5s lOd and costs.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18690625.2.9

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 1915, 25 June 1869, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,023

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 1915, 25 June 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 1915, 25 June 1869, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert