RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 2005, 8 October 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

This Day. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq , R.M.) DRUNKENNESS. John Simpson was fined 10s for drunkenness. Civil Cases. North and Secular v. Dick«on.—This was a claim for LlO, for services of Henry Stewart, to whom the defendant had given employment, he being apprenticed to the plaintiffs. Mr Stewart for the plaintiffs, and Mr Harris for the defendants. The plaintiff North gave evidence that he hj wing seen the boy go into the shop of Dickson, went and asked if he was working there, and being told he was. he told Mr Dickson that Stewart was lawfully apprenticed to North and Scoular, and still had three years to serve. He should, therefore, not allow the defendant to employ the lad, and should certainly sue him for the amount of work done by him. The defendant might have said, * ‘ If he is your apprentice you may take him away with you ” The witness might have told the boy he would kick him out of the shop if he would not work. The defendant said the plaintiff North called upon him in reference to the boy. and told him he did not want him ; and Scoular had _ said he might please himself as to engaging him. His Worship said it appeared clear to him that the defendant had retained the boy for eight days against the remonstrance and will of the plaintiffs. The determination of the hoy not to go back did not affect Dickson. It was time to put a stop to such procee'lings, and therefore under al the circumstances of the case he thought the plaint ffs entitled to L 5 and costs. Verdict for that amount. He niitrht say if the boy bad cause of complaint a ainst North and Scoular, why did not he take action under the Master and Apprentices Act? Mr Harris said that course would have been taken before bad not both the boy and his mother been under the impression that North and Scoular had gone as far as they intended, but now, no doubt, the suggestion wou:d be acted upon. M‘Gregor v, R, Dodds. —LlB 10s. Mr Stewart for the plaintiff. Judgment by default for the amount claimed. Howie v. Cairns and J. Campbell, master and owner of the schooner Defiance,—A claim for L2 19s. Mr Wilson for Campbell, who pleaded non-liability, as the work was done for Cairns, who chartered the schooner Defiance. The plaintiff said the defendant Cairns gave orders for an anchor stock and a lint? of a cable chain The work was done, and be applied to Cairns for payment, who referred Kim to Campbell ; and, on application to th.e latter he was referred to Cairns.-r-The defendant Caixtis'said the work was done on

Campbell's account, and by his direction.— Judgment was given for the plaintiff for the sum claimed against Cairns. Judgment for fie defendant, so far as Campbell was concerned.

Jessop v. Howe.—A claim for a balance of LI los 7«l, for goods supplied. The amount was admitted, and judgment was given for the amount, with costs.