RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2451, 23 December 1870, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Yesterday. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq., R.M.) Civil Cases. Ramsay v. Hannah.—Ll I 8s 3d, for wages. Judgment by default for the plaintiff. Wright, Stephenson, and Co. v. Simpson and Asher.—Ll3. Mr Stewart for the defence. The action was brought to recover the price of a mare bought at auction of the plaintiffs, which the defendants alleged was guaranteed “ quiet to ride and drive. ” When she was mounted she proved restive, reared, and fell backwards with a boy on her back. The plaintiffs denied guaranteeing her quiet to ride, but said she bad been broke to saddle and harness, and was quite to drive. Several witnesses were called to prove the warrantry. » His Worship considered the evidence in favor of the warrantry having been given. Judgment for the defendants. \ Barker v. Byford.—Ls, for cash advanced. Judgment by default for the plaintiff' for the amount, with costs. H. M'Dermid y. Gray, a claim for L2O for wrongful conversion of a quantity of timber lauded at Dunedin. Mr Harris for the plaintiff, Mr Stewart for the defendant. From the cvideuce of Mr M'Pennid, it appeared that Sheldrake and Co. were tenants of the plaintiff, and owed him L3O at the end of November, and about L 6 more on the 7th December. Sheldrake and Co. sold him 193 pieces of timber lying on Port Chalmers jetty, which plaintiff delivered to a lighterman named Bates for transmission to Dunedin. He sold the timber to Bennett and Wedderspoon, who after taking one load, dedined to take the remainder, which was taken-possession of by lire and Esther, and sold by them to the defendant. He applied to the defendant for payment, which was refused. In cross-examination the plaintiff * said Sheldrake and Co. owed about L3O near the end of November, but that an order for L3O was given by them on the defendant. The defendant said he had received the timber in question from Ure and Esther, having bought it at 8s Cd a hundred, that Mr Harris on behalf of M'Dermid asked either for the timber or that it should be paid for. Ure and Esther said they bought it of Sheldrake and Co. Sheldrake said at the beginning of December lie made no arrangement with the plaintiff to take the timber. (A letter given by the witness, authorising the plaintiff to take possession of the timber, was read.) There was no rent due at the end of last month. The timber was sold to Mr Esther, and was carted by the plaintiff on to the Wharf. Mr M'Dermid being recalled, said part rent was due at the time of sale of poods. Mr Stewart, for the defence, argued that the plaintiff was not ’ entitled to recover, as the property was acquired purchase of Ere and Esther, who had had possession of the timber. He cited precedents in supnort of his view. It was also plain that there was no sale to Mr M'Dermid, but it was a fraud on Ure and Esther by Mr M'Dermid and Sheldrake,

Mr Esther said that, on 6th December, .She 1 - drake owed about LlB. He a'hcd for pa' - ment of lr‘s account, and the result of the application was that he bought and took possession of the timber on Port Chalmers Jetty, by putting his hands on it. He took possession of it in Dunedin, but did not know by what means it arrived there. He sold it to Mr Cray. His Worship considered there was such discrepancy in the evidence that he was obliged to look at the documents before him. The sale note, dated Gth December, transferred the property to Esther ; and although Sheldrake had been almost guilty of fraud in giving M‘Demid the note on the 7th, ho did not consider he had a right to sell; and therefore judgment must be given for the defendant. Judgment accordingly. Mr Harris asked leave to appeal, which his Worship granted. Duncan v. Wilson and Co.—L63 Us 6d, for half the amount of the cost and expenses of a joint adventure on beef exported to the Fiji Islands and returned to Dunedin. Mr Harris for the plaintiff ; Mr Stewart for the defendant. The plaintiff, in evidence, said on December, 1 Stiff, he commanded the schooner Crest of the Wave. Ho way about to soul a cargo to the Fijis, and he entered into a joint speculation with the defendant fur twenty barrels of beef, for the value of which Messrs Wilson and Co. drew upon him. and the bill was paid. Whatever profit or loss ensued was to be equally divided between plaintiff and defendant. The beef did not sell at Fiji, and was brought back and sent to Messrs K. B. Martin and Co., to be sold by Messrs M'Landrcss and Co. Ho owed Wilson and Co. L3l ss, which he said was to stand against thp half share of his risk. H. Cam crop was engaged last Do? cemher to go as super-cargo of the Crest of the Wave. The beef was unsaleable at Fiji at that time. Two casks were taken for ship’s use. It was mixed —mutton, pork, and beef, and on that account less saleable than if of one description. He sold one cask at Port Chalmers invoice price, but got no offer for the rest, although he he saw every merchant in Lovuka. It was lauded and covered with a tarpaulin, it Lav. iug become necessary to laud it through the captain allowing the vessel to go ashore. 11. B. Martin was agent for Captain Duncan in December last, and recollected twenty casks of beef formed part of the general cargo. On the return of the vessel they were sent to M ‘Landl ess, Hepburn, and Co, for sale, llppoated attempt# had been made to sell it, but it was unsold. He was present on one occasion at a conversation be. tween plaintiff and defendant when the latter admitted that it was a joint specula, tien, and in consequence had urged Wilson to try to sell the meat, He never was ap. plied to by defendant for the beef, although he told Captain Duncan he had applied for delivery of it to him, and had baeu refused, Simpson on one occasion said something to the effect that the meat being returned was a matter of indifference as it should have been sold in Fiji. A. Carrick had possession of an agreement between plaintiff and defendant, which he gave to Mr Harris. Was present at a conversation between Duncan and Wilson, when the latter charged him with n fus ng to give up the meat, which he * (witness) denied. The freight was L.'l 10s a ton to Fiji, ami in such a case it would probably he about one-half for the return freight^

The defendant acknowledged the agreement. Mr Stewart said he did not know that it was necessary to go into the case, as it was a case of partnership, and one partner could not sue another at law, as it must be settled in equity during the course of the partnership. Mr Harris said the Court was tone of equity as well as law, and therefore the case was not beyond the jurisdiction of the Court. His Worship considered the case beyond his jurisdiction, especially as no account was stated. Mr Harris asked the Court t« take time to consider the point, and whether in the event of the transaction bring closed he considered he would have jurisdiction. His Worship said bis present view was that he had no jurisdiction until a sum was agreed to as divisible between the partners. Judgment deferred.

This Day,

(Before A. C. Strode, Esq,, 11.M.) Civic Cases. Bacon and Meyer v. Boberts. —L 27 10s, a claim for tbc amount of a promissory note. Judgment by default for the plaintiffs. Saunte v. Keyton. L34 Os Id, Judgment for tbc sum of L 25 5s 9d. Maloy v. Patterson—L22 for work and labor done. Mr Harris for the plaintiff; Mr Catatnore for the defendant. Judgment tor the plaintiff, Lls Bs. Macdonald v. Brearty. —LB 10s. Mr Ham's for the defence. L2 10s was paid into Court. This was a claim for hire for a biu'f'V and damage done to it. The defence wasthat the buggy was not in a safe- condition as the accident occurred through a bo t comm" out, and causing the harness to tall amongst the legs of the horses. Judgment for the amount paid into court.