RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 2038, 16 November 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

This Day, (Before J, Fulton, Esq., 11.M.) DBUt'KJSN' ESS. John Summer aucl Alice Davis were each fined 10a.—Mary Allen was lined L 5, or, in default, fourteen days’ imprisonment. KEEPING A DISORDERLY HOUSE. Jane M'Lcod was charged with being the occupier of a house frequented by persons having no visible lawful means of support. Mr Ward defended.—lt appeared from the evidence of the police that the defendant was the occupier of a house of ill-fame in Walker street, which was frequented by abandoned characters of the worst description.—ln defence it was stated that the defendant had since removed.-- She was discharged with a caution, MINOR OFFENCES. E. J. Legrove, charged with furious riding, was discharged with a caution.—Win. Keid, for being at an improper distance from his horse and dray, was fined 5s and costs. INFORMATIONS BY THE INSPECTOR OF NUISANCES. Henry Steadman, for plying for hire with a coach without being licensed, was fined 5s and co.:ts; and a similar penalty was im Eosed on Samuel Webb for neglecting to cep his premises clean. —John Cook was fined 5s and costs for allowing c<>ws to wander.—Alex. Davis was charged with neglecting to keep his promises eb an, but as the nuisance had been abated, the case was dismissed. pawnbroker’s license. The application <jf Abraham Solomon, for the renewal of a pawnbroker’s license for premises situated In George street, was granted.

THREATENING LANGUAGE. Eliza Growdon prayed that G. Sutton might he bound over to keep the peace. The complainant said that defendant had, when intoxicated, threatened to burn down her beehive ; she had had no quarrel with him. Ho denied that he entertained any ill-wilt towards her, and denied all knowledge of ever having used threatening language towards her. He had offered to remove from the neighborhood, and she had expressed herself satisfied with the proposal. The Magistrate bound him over in his own surety of L 5 to keep the peace for three months.

Civil Gapes,

Webb v. Captain Fox, master of the ship England, was a claim for L2O, value of a cask of oil, shipped on board the England, and delivered here in bad condition. Mr Macassey for plaintiff, and Mr Wilson for defendant. Mr Macassey, in his opening statement, said that the question involved in the suit before the Court was one that had not been raised here before, and one of a most important kind. The decision of his Worship would turn solely perhaps on a bill of lading, by wliicK the defendant received on board his ship in England, on account of the defendant, a number of packages m good order and condition. Those goons were enumerated in the margin of the bill of lading, and amongst other things were six casks of oil. By the bill of lading the defendant undertook to deliver the goods, subject to the perils of the sea, in the same order and condition as they were received. When, however, the goods were delivered one of the casks was perfectly empty ; the cause being, he believed, that a hole was bored in one of the staves, and the contents had thus leaked out. It would be perfectly plain that this hole was either made before the goods were shipped, or since. Whenever it had been bored was not material to the he proposed to submit to the Court. He submitted two a ternatives, either that the hole had been bored in the cask before it was shipped, or that it was made designedly after it was shipped. If the cask was leaking at the time it was shipped, the captain ought to have detected it; and through his own carelessness he had signed for what was contrary to fact; and by so signing, the consignee had given valuable consideration for the goods, the latter being placed in a false position, In “ Abbot's Law of Merchant Shipping,” it was laid down “that the bill of lading is the written acknowledgment of the ma-ter that he has r ccived the goods from the shipper to be convoyed therein on the terms therein expressed to their destination, and there delivered to the parties by him desitnated. The master therefore should be caeful not to sign hills of lading until the goods are actua’ly delivered to him, nor to permit the insertion of statements in the bill of lading at variance with the fact, or of a nature to mislead, or give ri-e to misunderstanding By so doing he may involve his owners in litigation, and become responsible to them and to other parties ” At the same page reference was made to a false statement, In the case of Howard and others v. Tucker, Lord Tenterdcn said, “that the captain might be answerable to his principals for having signed an instrument which contained an incorrect stateim nt; yet that third persons, who took the bill of lading on the faith of such statement, for a value to which they might otherwise have thought it inadequate, ought not to suffer for it. ” He (Mr Macassey) would show that upon the receipt of the bill of lading, informing him that the goods had been shipped in good order and condition, the plaintiff had given valuable consideration for them. The goods had, according to the bill o f lading, been received in good order and condition. The clause in the bill of lading would protect the captain from damage resulting from perils of the sea, ordinary leakage, &c., but the clause did not protect him from the cons quences of making a false statement. He called Mr S. Webb, who stated that he was an importer of oils and colors in Dunedin. He was the consignee of the goods per ship England, to which the hill of lading produced referred. He received delivery of goods at different times—the first about three weeks ago. He had not taken delivery of the cask, the subject of this action. It was lying at the goods shed, where he saw it. The cask was perfectly empty, the oil having got out of a hole at the bottom. The hole appeared to have been bored with a gimlet. The cask when full would have weighed between 200 and 300 lbs He received the bill of lading ten weeks before the ship’s arrival, and he paid for the goods after receiving it. John Scanlan, color merchant, stated that he saw the cask at the jetty. It was perfectly empty ; but he thought the hole which had caused the leak was the result of accident. in cross-examination witness said that he saw nails sticking through the inside of the cask. J. Hamaan, lighter agent, examined the cask. The inside was pefecbly dry, and it must have been empty for some time. The hole was apparently a gimlet hole ; and nails that had been driven through the cask were perfectly visible from the outside. For the defence, the following evidence was given : W. H. Reynolds, Lloyds' Agent : I held a survey on a cask, marked S.W. 108, ex England. It was perf •■ctly empty, the leak having occurred through a hole near the top. On the top be’ng removed, I discovered that there was near y a dozen nails in the ca k—some of them driven right through the staves from the outs’de. I think the nails had been driven in before the oil was put in. One of the nails had dropped out, and it was from there that the leakage took pla e. The cask was previously us eel for dry goals. In cross-examination, witness said the nails were visible from the outside. Some of them had been driv. n right through the staves, and some had been driven into the cask before the hoops were put on. James Edwards, marine surveyor, held a survey on the cask, in the England’s hold. It had been properly stowed. It was apparently a good one. By Mr Macassey : The cask had not been removed ; its emptiness was discovered by sounding it. If there were nails in it, it might not to have been received on board. He examined it, hut could not tell where the leak was. He did not see any nails. The cask leaked while in the ship, for there were traces of the oil. Win. Hart, second officer of the England, saw the cask stowed in the hold in London, It was in passable condition. He noticed no nails. It was not perfectly dry when taken on board. Mr Macassey wished to call rebutting evidence.

Mr Ham arm was again put in the box, and, in answer to the Magistrate, said that the nails were not easily discernible. Hi" Worship deferred judgment until Thursday.