RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2615, 5 July 1871, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

This Day. (Before A. 0. Strode, Esq., R.M.) Civil Cases. McKenzie v. Mitchell. Llo. Mr Cats* more for the plaintiff. The claim was made for money paid by the plaintiffs on account of the defendant. Judgment by default for the plaintiff for the amount with costs. Farrow v. Bmnett and another. Lll Is 9d for balance of wages and travelling expenses. Mr Stewart for the defendant, Mr Catamore for the plaintiff. F. Farrow stated that he was in the employ of the defendants as clerk and collector for four years, and left them on the 26th June last. The arrange* ment was, he was to have wages at the rate of L 3 a-week, payable fortnightly, subject to proper notice. The plaintiff, in examination, said that under instructions from Mr Wedderspoon, one of the partners, he went to collect money at the Taieri, and on his return was reproved in abusive language by Bennett. On June 25fch, Bennett was ordered to go, on the plea that he had'given notice to leave. Plaintiff refused to go without proper notice. A set off was put in which was admitted, with the exception of 8s over, charge for bricks. For the defendant, it was urged that the plaintiff was not originally engaged as clerk and collector, that ne had taken a horse and gone to the Taieri without authority to collect a small amount, and that there was no agreement as to notice, and that he had discharged himself. Judgment for the defendant. Inch v. Brown was adjourned to this day week. Cunningham v. -Fraser. LlO. Mr Howorth applied for a reconsideration of the expeuces of witnesses allowed in a former case to several who had given no material evidence. His Worship said he could not re-open that case, as all had been settled up, and the application should have been made at the time, Mr Bathgate said it would not do to encourage such litigiousness. His Worship observed nothing could fairly be said ou that point, as each party was blamable. This was a claim for damage for unlawfully impounding cattle, and was a mere case of repr.sal of no public interest. Judgment for plaintiff L 5 and costs.