RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 1973, 1 September 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Tins Day. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq., R.M.) DRUNK AND DISORDERLY. Kate Farrar was charged with conducting herself in a disorderly manner in Manse street, on the night of the 31st August; fined 20s, or, in default, 48 hours’ imprisonment. —John Cunningham was charged with being drunk and disorderly on 31st August; fined 20s, or 24 hours’ imprisonment.—John Pringle was similarly charged, and fined 40* or one week’s imprisonment.—John Smith was charged with being drunk ami disorderly on Ist inst; fined 10s, or 12 hours’ imprisonment. Civil Cases. G. Dowse v. G. Bobinson.—A claim for L2l 4s, for saddlery, Ac. No appearance of defendant. Verdict for plaintiff, together with costs. Kempthome, Prosser, and Co., v. Capt. Kennedy (s.s. Airedale).—Mr Ward for plaintiffs. A claim for Ll4 Is Bd, value of two cases of drugs, stated to have been delivered on board the Airedale for Lyttelton, which drugs had never been delivered at that port. Defendant pleaded not indebted, as the goods in question had never been received on board his vessel. From the opening remarks made by Mr Ward for the plaintiffs, the Magistrate said he saw very iittle use of proceeding with the case with such meacre evidence as Mr Ward was submitting, and as Captain Kennedy had stated he never received the goods on board, and no receipt was forthcoming for the delivery of the goods. Mr Ward asked permission to withdraw the case. Case withdrawn. W. Gregg v. J. Hughes (master of the Angelina).— 'lbis was an adjourned case. Plaint’ff suing for damages for destroying some whiskey shipped by him in the Angelina for Auckland. Mr Stewart for plaintiff ; Mr Wilson for defendant. J. Hobson was examined, and stated he was head storeman in the Victoria bond; was there all day, and had the whiskey been tampered with he should certainly have been aware of the fact. Mr Wilson contended that Hughes as master of the Angelina was not responsible for goods delivered on board a vessel that he was only master of, but that the owners of the vessel were so, and he therefore claimed a nonsuit on the three following points;—l. That the master was not responsible. 2. That the bill of lad ng was not binding on the master. 3. The landing waiter’s certificate was not admissable in evidence. Mr Stewart contended that the plaintiff’s case had been proved in every point. The evidence went to prove that the whiskey had been delivered from the bond on board the Angelina, and from the time that the whiskey was delivered he maintained the master was responsible for it, both as regards the quantity and quality. He charged freight and recovered the same. He therefore claimed a verdict for the plaintiff for the value of the whole of the twelve qr-casks whisky as all had been tampered wixh and damaged, as well as there being twelve gallons shot delivered at Auckland. His Worship said he would reserve judgment until Friday to consider the points raised by the counsel for the defendant. Findlay and Gilmour v. Hutchins A claim for LSO, balance of contract. Mr St wart for plaintiff, Mr Macassey for defendant. Mr Stewart had only concluded the case for the plaintiffs, at 4 o’clock, our reporter leaving Mr Macassey addressing the Bench for the defence.