RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2524, 20 March 1871, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Tins Day.

(Before I. Newton Wjitt, Esq., R. M.)

Civil Cases,

Speckling v. Marks—L2 4s Gil. Judgment by default. Rylcy v. D.alziel—Ll 14s for work done. The defence was that the work was not done according to contract. Judgment for defendant. Briscoe and Co. v. Snrman and Davies (Queenstown)—Lit) IGs, for lead supplied. The circumr-tances of this ease were peculiar, in October last defendants ordered a quantity of lead piping from the plaintiffs by telegram, and on the 9tb November sent another to’egram to them as follows :—“ Do not send lead but through a mistake on the part of the operator the telegram as received was, “ Did not send lead,” which the plaintiff's construed as a reminder, and expedited its delivery. In consequence of cartage being scarce the lead did not reach Queenstown until December, when defendants refused to take delivery. Mr Stewart, who appeared for the plaintiff--, cited a case dcci fed in England recently, where it was held that the receiver of the telegram was not bound by any mistakes in it, and that only the sender had a right of action against the Telegraph authorities. Judgment was given for the plaintiffs. UR EACH OF THE LICENSING ORDINANCE Mary M‘Cairo was charged with this offence. It .appeared that, as usual, the defendant opened her booth at the Cricket Ground about three weeks’ ago, but on the day in question had not been able to take out a license in time. Mr Lumb, the revenue officer, said be had no desire to press the case, but had merely brought it forward as a matter of duty. The defendant, for whom Mr Barton appeared, was fined 20s.