RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 2998, 27 September 1872, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Tins Day. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq., R.M.) Civil Cases. Barnet and Levien v. John Renshaw,—A claim for L6O 12s 2d, the amount of a dishonored acceptance, interest, and other charges. Judgment for the plaintiff by default for the amount, with costs. Potter v. D. M‘Connell.—L39 17s Bd, for stabling and horse feed, Mr Stout for the plaintiff. Judgment fur the plaintiff by default for the amount, with costs.

Otago and Southland Investment Company v. A. J. Burns, —L 75, for one quarter’s interest on a loan of L3OOO. Mr Jas. Smith for the plaintiffs ; Mr Barton, and with him Mr G, Cook for the defendant. Mr Barton held that since a second quarter’s interest was due, the amount of the claim, if any, amounted to Ll 50, and that consequently the case was not within the jurisdiction of the Court, as it was not competent to divide the sum due into portions when it forme;! one cause of action. Mr Smith replied that the cause of action arose out of rent for the use of money payable on distinct days, and the contract itself separated the different amounts into distinct causes of action. The plaintiffs had not any necessity to sue for the full amount. The separability of the causes of action was proved, because the second quarter’s interest might have been assigned to a third person, in which case the present plaintiffs would not be in a position to sue, and although this had not been done, the fact of the amounts being thus separable established the jurisdiction of the Court. His Worship held a strong opinion that this was a splitting of the cause of action, according to the particulars of

1 demand. He would, however, if it were J thought desirable, reservespe point. Mr Smith asked for a nonsuit, lihdsllhe plaintiffs were nonsuited accordingly. Mr Barton applied for costs, which were refused on the ground of non-jurisdiction. Machin v. Staveley.—L9 15s. Mr Stout for the plaintiff; Mr James Smith for the defendant. This was a claim for one quarter’s, rent due Isth January. The defendant is assignee of Donald M‘ Fie, and he was sued iu that capacity. Mr Smith submitted that the Court had no jurisdiction in the case involved a question of title to laud. Mr Stout replied that the title was not disputed. Mr Smith rested the case on the evidence given that Staveley had not taken possession of the property. Judgment for the plaintiff with costs. Meek v. Paterson.—Lloo, for breach of agreement in the charter of the vessel Pakeha. Mr Stout for the plaintiff ; Mr Haggitt for the defendant. From the statement by Mr Stout, it appeared that the defendant offered to take a cargo from Oamaru of grain or Hour to Auckland for L‘2so or to Queensland, L 375. The offer was accepted for Auckland, but on arrival at Dunedin, the defendant declined to conclude the agreement. Thomas Meek, in his evidence, said that in consequence of the refusal of the defendant to load, he had not been able to get cargo away. The freight agreed upon was about LI per ton, but during the month, LI 7s 6d. By the rise in the rate of freight the firm had lost considerably more than LIOO. In reply to Mr Haggitt, the plaintiff said the . iDst letter accepting Paterson’s offer was written on unstamped paper. A letter stamped with an agreement etamp was written after the day on which the letter accepting the offer was made, but bearing the same date. His impression was, it was forwarded by the following post. He did not send the stamped letter, because the Insurance Offices refused to insure vessels lying at Oamaru. Ho did not believe he had escaped a loss through the Pakeha not going to Auckland and taking flour to a bad market. Messrs Macassey and Holmes sent an offer to the plaintiff to go to Oamaru and load immediately after discharging his cargo at Moeraki, but it did not suit them to take her. Keith Ramsay explained the attempts made to obtain a vessel for <lamaru. When Captain Paterson offered on the 4th September to go to Oamaru and to load ho could have obtained a higher rate of freight, James Anderson said had flour arrived on the Bth September, it would have arrived when the market was at its ' highest. The case was adjourned for a week to give opportunity to Captain Paterson to attend.