MAYOR’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2193, 18 May 1870, Page 2

MAYOR’S COURT.

This Day. (Before Captain Fraser and George Brodie, Esq., J.P.’s.) drunk and disordkrlv. John Connor, for drunkenness, was fined 40s, or three days’ imprisonment; Walter Kayner, 40s, or three days; and Amelia Gnhic, LJ, or fourteen days. CHARGE OF SI’LUKO ALE RETAIL WITHOUT A ' LIC ESSE. James M‘Vickers was charged with soiling a glass of ale without a license. The defendant was cautioned and the case dismissed,

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, This Day. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq., R. M,) Civil Cases. Millar v. Couzens—A claim for wages and property detained. The plaintiff claimed LI for wages, 1.4 for two boxes, and Ll4 for loss of time. The defendant stated the plaintiff left his service without notice, and that she could have her boxes on application. The plaintiff, who had evidently been drinking, behaved in a singular manner. Verdict for the defendant. F. Campbell v. Williams—A claim for balance of wages for 1(1 days, at 11s per day. L7os 6d had been paid on account. Mr Stewart for the plaintiff; Mr Harris for the defence. The defence was that the wages were overcharged, and that Us had been charged instead of 10s, and, further, there was a set off of LI 12s, for a tent. Evidence was given by the plaintiff to shew that the rate of wages agreed upon was charged, and that tents were agreed to be found by the defendant. This was denied by the defendant, who said when he gave an order for the tent he stated he should charge the amount against them. Judgment for plaintiff L 8 2s 3d, each party paying half costs. John Campbell v. J. Williams—L9 13s for wages and travelling exponces. For the defence, an order was put in for L 5 7s 6d by plaintiff, which Mr Williams in the first instance refused to pay; but had since paid. He would swear that it was not paid since the action was commen;cd on the 11th of the month. The defence to the order was that Campbell, seeing there was some mistake, gave notice to Mr Williams not to pay it, and it was stated by Mr Hawkins, in whose favor it was made, that no payment had been made before the action commenced. The defence was, therefore, that the order was revoked, and ought not to have been paid. There was also a dispute about L2 ss, coach fare up to Waiwera, which the plaintiff’ claimed ; but for the defence it was stated the wages were altered and the coach fare was cons iquenly relinquished. His Worship was of opinion that in regard to the coach fare it was usual to allow it by cont.xactnrs; be should therefore allow it. As to the order it would bo allowed as a set-off. Judgment for plaintiff L2 8s fid and cists. Kelsey v. Bates —L2, the amount of an 1.0. U. Judgment by default for plaintiff. (Before James Fulton, Esq., R.M.) Edwards v. Driver and Maclean —Mr Haggitt for the plaintiff; Mr Harris for the defendant. This was a claim forLlfi 13s 4d, for tarpaulin supplied. For the defence, a sale and delivery were admitted ; but it was pleaded the goods were not according to contract. From the evidence it was stated that about the Ist November Mr Maclean called on the plaintiff to purchase a tarpaulin 30 x 40, for drying wool, aad said an old sail would do. Two qualities were submitted, and he chose the lower quality and agreed to the price. Early in January complaint was made of the quality. Evidence was given on both sides. His Worship considered the evidence in favor of-the plaintiff, and judgment was given accordingly.