RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3020, 24 October 1872, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Yesterday. (Before A. C, Strode, Esq., R.M.)

Civil Cases. Duncan v. Smith,—Ll4 6s for flour supplied. Mr Edward Cook for the plaintiff. Judgment by default for the plaintiff for the I amount, with costs. Darling (trustee for Bennett and Wedderspoon) v. Brown and Waugh.—Lll 19s 2d. Mr Stewart for the plaintiff; Mr Ed, Cook for the defence. This case had been adjourned for further evidence. Wedderspoon, one of the firm of Bennett and Wedderspoon, knew the defendant Brown, fie could not say positively whether the goods in question were supplied to Brown and Waugh. Both told him they were in partnership in the job for Mrs Baiu in Cumberland street. The goods were sold to them jointly. Thos. Bennett, gave evidence to the saute effect. For the defence, Charles Brown was recalled. When the timber was ordered he saw both Bennett and Wedderspoon. Orders were taken by the salesman. W augh was the sole contractor, and he (witness) was working for wages. He could not contradict the evidence of Bennett and Wedderspoon as to what passed, for he did not recollect. John Waugh, one of the defendants, said Brown and he wove together wften tjmbpr was ordered, He (witness)' did not remember saying anything of the partnership. Brown was not a partner, and he believed he mentioned that to the salesman, and objected te the account when it was presented to him as due from Brown and Waugh. His Worship considered that it was plain Brown had represented himself a partner with Waugh. Judgment for the plaintiff’ for the amount claimed, with costs. Baxter v. Macgregor.—2os. This was a claim for the damage done to a glass case, and smashing two amber mouthpieces. The plaintiff stated that he had a glass case containing prepared native walking sticks, which exposed outside during the day. at the corner of 'Brtnoes High streets, and taken up some stairs at night, A meeting of publicans was held on certain evenings, and Mr Macgregor, attending ono of them, knocked the case down. He (defendant) had the case repaired by Craig and Gillies, and the present suit was for damage which he refused to pay. The defendant said there was a meeting of licensed victuallers, he believed on the 6th July, which he attended, and on throwing a door open hastily, the case fell down and broke. A light was procured, and everything carefully picked up. He did not consider himself liable to pay for repairs, but had the case put in order. Witnesses were palled, who said the case at the time of the accident was banging ou g scjrew, but since that time a hook had been substituted. Hip Worship considered the fall of the case was mere accident, arising from the case being insecurely hung. Judgment for the defendant. Docking v, Williamson was adjourned for a week.