RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2703, 16 October 1871, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

This Day. (Before I. N. Watt, Esq., R.M.) Civil Casks. Britten v. Fawkner. —L3 ss, for board and lodging of a child in the Industrial School. Judgment for plaintiff, L2 ss, with costs, LI having been paid on account. Joel v. John Tait.—Lß 3s Gd, for' goods supplied. Judgineut by default for the plaintiff lor the amount, with costs. Harrington v. Cutten.—L3. This was a claim for a month’s wages detained by the defendant on the plea that the plaintiff had left at a week’s notice instead of a month. The plaintiff said he was engaged at los a week, and agreed to allow los as he had left without giving a week’s notice 'I he reason why he left abruptly was that Mrs Cutten found fault with him for given, as she asserted, 24 quarts of milk to the calves. The defendant cross-questioned the plaintiff to show that he had spoiled a cow for milking by allowing her calf to suck her dry, and that he had placed milk in such a position that the calves could knock it over. Mr Cutten held that the plaintiff was a yearly servant, and entitled to forfeit a month’s wages. This was evident by the fact acknowledged by the plaintiff that his wages had been paid irregularly, and that through wilfully damaging the cattle he was really liable to forfeit the whole of his wages. Judgment deferred. Josling v. Wright and Maclean (Trustees in the Estate of Scott and Josling).—LS 12s Sd, for costs charged in excess of expenses in the Resident Magistrate’s Comt. Mr JJoworth for the plaintiff; Mr Haggitt for the defendant. Mr Howorth stated the case was that the trustees sued plaintiff for the value of a watch, for which judgment was given by the Court with L2 lOs 4d costs. The defendants elected to take the watch on payment of costs, which were staled to be Lll 12s, instead of the amount awarded, L2O. This sum was paid under the impression of its being correct, and the plaintiff sought to recover the money paid in ex- . ess of the costs of Court. He had paid it to avoid execution with which he was threatened, but did not expect to pay more than the costs of Court.—Mr Wright, on being examined, said that Mr Moore called on Josling’s behalf, and he agreed that on plaintiff’s paying the whole of the costs and giving up the watoh the matter would be settled.—Mr Haggitt said there was no case to answer, as according to the statement of the plaintiff he was aware of the amount of the claim for costs at the time he paid it, and there was no misrepresentation of facts, Josling was liable to pay nearly L 23 on judgment of the Court, and Mr Wright agreed to take the watch, which fetched about Ll2 10s, and full costs in lieu of the sum adjudged.—C. Moore said he called by agreement with Josling on Mr Wright to arrange about the matter, and the latter consented to receive the watch in lieu of the amount awarded, on all the costs being paid. —The Magistrate considered that a distinct arrangement had been made between plaintiff and defendants in lieu of paying the award of the Court. Judgment for the defendants.