RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 2003, 6 October 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES COURT.

This Day. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq., R.M.) DRUNKARDS. Mary Jarvey, for habitual druukenhess, was fined 40s or one weeks’ imprisonment ; George Sutton, for drunkenness, was fined 20s or 48 hours ; William Johnston,. Ifis or 24 hours ; Frederick Smith, 10s or 24h- urs ; William Stuart, 10s or 24 hours ; Mary Forbes and William Laurie, 10s each or 24 hours. CHARGE OF STEALING. Charles Williams, charged with stealing from the Scandinavian Hotel, was seized with a fit in Court, and remanded. Civil Cases. O’Brien v. Barnes.—Mr Wilson for the plaintiff. The plaintiff, who is an artist, sought to recover L 8 for work done in making a painting of the defendant’s property. The painting, a very well executed one, was produced in Court. Mr Barnes pleaded not indebted, and examined the plaintiff as follows : Defendant : Do you say this ia a correct drawing of my property ?—I do. How many houses have you got besides ? AL I could see. You have got four cottages besides mine ? 1 have net charged you for them. They are on y addenda to the picture. Row many acres is there?—l do not know. How do you know this property belongs to me?— You told me so. The defendant (Barnes), examined by Mr Wilson— Do you recollect seeing the defendant about the 24fch August ?—1 recollect seeing him two or three months ago. Did anything take place about making this drawing ?—I might have said I had seen two pictures of his iu shop windows, and I said very likely when I ha I put up a verandah to Mr Wilson’s house I might have my own taken. He says, “Well, I could not take that at present. I am so busy. ” Did you never give him any order for it at all? 1 did not, or else I should have had each house taken by itse f. To the Bench : Your Worship will see each house might have been taken separate without havin'/ all that bit took. If I had seen him drawing my houses I would have spoke to him, and told him how to draw them. There’s only two and a-faalf chains to all three houses, and he’s got there about twenty chains. 'lhat’s pe*spective, Mr Barnes?—A man may draw England, Ireland, and Scotland in a picture, and charge for it. You know that property—can you tell me where those ash trees is ? His Worship : You are not here to question Mr Wilson, Mr Barms. By Mr Wilson: You would not have every tree drawn ?—There’s a great many trees there that’s not on the ground. You saw the plaintiff sketching there ? No, I did not see that. mI to stop and ask every man that I see sketching what he’s doing? He’s sometimes buried in a bush, and one doesn’t know what he’s doing, an 1 sees nothing but his head. From that day to this I never spoke to that man. His Worship : I understand you to say you never gave orders for that painting ? No. His Worship said it was one of those cases in which the plaintiff and defendant swore directly in opposition to each other and he must therefor* decide for the defendant. Mr Wilson applied for a nonsuit, and the plaintiff was nonsuited accordingly. Mr Barnes applied for his expences on the ground that his attendance in court nece-sitated ear ier rising on his part to overtake the work that he was forced to set aside. HrWorship thought that that might be a benefit to the di-fendant’a health, but as he was in receipt of a stated annual salary he was not entitled to expenses. Slater v. Wright, of Hislop and Wright. —For balance of account due. Mr Wilson for the plaintiff, and Mr Cooke for the defence. The case was arranged out of court; the defendant agreeing to pay L 5 2s and costs. Verdict accordingly. Adjourned to 3 o’clock. EXTENDED JURIS lOTION.

Murray v. The Trustees of the New Zealand Buildingandln vestment Society.—Lloo. A journed case. Mr Ban on for the plaintilf ;Mr Macassey for the defence. Mr De Carle, autioneer. proved selling the property as instructed by Messrs Howorth and Hodgkins, as solicitors for the Building Society. The conditions of sale as read by Mr Hodg kins, were one fourth cash, the remainder on the 14th August. He also sid that he was authorised to state that arrangements could be made for the purchaser to take he position of Berrill with the Building Society to pay the amount at L 9 per mouth. Mr Hodgkins, of the firm of Howorth and Hodgkins, gave evidenc; as to the sale and the conditions stated at the auction, which was confirmed by Mr \V, 0. Ball. Secretary to the Society. The difference between paying off the L 560 at L 9 per month, with interest and without interest, for four aud a-half years, would be L 267. That is, if Mr Murray paid the L 9 per month, as he proposed, and as he must have paid it had he come under the rules of the Society, that would have been the difference. Verdict for the defendant.