RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 2043, 22 November 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT

This Dat. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq., R.M.) DRUNK AND DISORDERLY. Ann White for disorderly conduct was fined 20s or 48 hours’ imprisonment. Henry Steele, for drunkenness was fined 10s, or 24 hours’ imprsonment. Civil Cases, Maurice Joel v. Kirk.—A claim for L 5 19s for balance of account. Judgment for th. plaintiff for the amount by default. Watson and Gow v. James Rate.—A claim for L 6 2s, balance of account for work done and material supplied. Judgment by default for the plaintiff for the amount. Thos. Hollands v. W. Mitchell.—A claim for L2O on a dishonored acceptance. The defendant did not appear, and judgment was given for the amount bv default. R. Kirkmau v. W. Mrchell —LS 12s, for work and labor done. Judgment by default for the plaintiff for the amount. Jacob Segur v. Chas. A. Grutt.—los, for boots repaired. Judgment for the amount by default. J. E. Ponlton r. J. Ranndge.—A claim for LI 6d. The defe idant pleaded in debted in the sum of 12s, for one week’s rent. The plaintiff claimed compen sation for damage done to the premises, in addition to the rent. From the ev dence it appeared that in the first instance the def- nd nt took a shop at 12s a week on condition that wh- n the p!a e should he put in thorough repair tiie re t was to be 15s. After one week at the higher rent, the defendant took away his goods by moonlight. His Worship c msidered the evidence was in f tvor of the plaintiff. Judgment for the amoant with costs.

G. Proudfoot v. W. C. Young.—A claim for Ll6lßa 10cl for telegraph posts purchased but not delivered Mr Wilson for the plain tiff Mr Young admitted the sale, but pleaded that the non-delivery was owing to a breach of con Tact by the plaintiff. The plaintiff said that he purchased a number of telegraph posts at Is lOd each, and offered to give a cheque for the amount. Mr Tully, Mr Young’s clerk, sad they were not counted. On calling again and proffering to give a cheque for the amount, be was told they were sold—For the defence Mr J. T. Tully said he sold the posts to Mr Proudfoot at Is 10d each for cash. Mr Proudfoot promised to call in and get the posts counted. No particular day was named, but on severa occasions the plaintiff promised to call and did not. Not keeping his promise, the posts were re-sold, and the plaintiff was informed by letter of the fact.—His Worship considered the main point was, whether on a specified day the plaintiff agreed to go and see the posts counted ; and whether he ful filled that condition of the agre-. ment. It appeared he did not go to see them counted, and, not having fulfilled the condition, he had no alternative, but to nonsuit the plaintiff. W. J. Birch v. Robert Ellis—Ll 5 11s fid—a claim for balance of 174 weeks’ wages, at LI per week ;Mr Wilson for the plaintiff. The defendant said he was owner of a cab, but he did not iake out a licence, and therefore was finable f>r it. The agreement with Birch was, that he would give him 20s a week so long as it would pay. He brought 13s home in a fortnight. He was kept 154 week’s by him, as be was expecting‘a remittance out from home. Judgment for the plaintiff, Lls 11s fid, with costs. Ann Go dspinck v. M. A Sutton.—A cla m of L 9 3s, balance of wages ; Mr Wrsou for the plaintiff; Mr Ward for the defendant. Judgment for the defendant. Bowden v. Lynns.—A claim for L2 16a 2d. Judgment for plaintiff for the amount.