RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3252, 23 July 1873, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Wednesday, July 23

i (Before I. N. Watt, Esq., R.M.) Lee Chung v. Lee Sing.—Mr Stout, for lain tiff, applied for a re-hearing of this case, rhich was heard some weeks ago in this [ourt, on the ground of the Chinese interLter’s original translation being incorrect. Ir Stewart opposed the application, which Fas not granted. I Gollar v. Dawson.—Claim LI Is lOd. Ilaintiff did not appear. Defendant admitted living 19s, and stated that he had been Fought from beyond the Clutha to defend Ee case, thereby losing a situation.—iudglent was given for plaintiff for 19s, an I deIndant was allowed LI 5s for expense. 1 . I Atkinson v. FI exman,—Claim L 6 12s for ire of pony, saddle, and bridle, for eleven Lys, at 12s per day. Mr Stewart for plainIff Mr Wilson for defendant. Plaintiff fated that he kept a pony partly for his jwn use and partly for hire. Defendant Iked him one day if he could have the pony tr a few days, to which he assented, defeulant returning it about four o’clock the same jay. Vlaintiff entered the time in his jocket-book each day that defendant used lie pony. When he rendered his account tr hire, defendant said he had considered lie transaction in the light of a loan. —Defendant stated that he was at Driver and lo.’s store one day, and mentioned that his [orse had not been sent to town, when plain|ff said he had a pony close by which he jould use, if he would feed it: could have it |t any time, in fact. He used the pony five jr six times, not eleven. When plaintiff fendered his account, defendant told him feat he used the pony as 1 ?* loan, and refused jo pay it.—John Barr, and John Ray, both ji defendant’s employment, stated that they jad fetched the pony from plaintiff’s at different times, always asking plaintiff for the tan of it.—Judgment was given for defen - Ant, without coats. ■Wilson v, Ridley,—Claim L 4 12s LOd. «iutiff, as attorney for Mr E. Menlove, Kd defendant for the debt due to the latter

t meat supplied.—Mr Branson for plain* S. Smith, clerk to Mr Wilson, ud fiWly acting in the same capacity for If^eulov&sproduced the books proving the e bt. —Judgment for plaintiff for amount aimed, with costs. C. mith v. G. Dodson.—Claim L2, in lieu E a week’s notice of dismissal. Plaintiff ;ated that he was engaged by defendant as asistaut groom, and after being in his service ir eight weeks, was dismissed on Kriday ist without notice.—Defendant stated that laintiff had been impertinent, - and was diseased in consequence. His wag is were paid p to Saturday last, and it was not cusTmary to give a week’s notice to grooms, as ley were in the habit of leaving their emloyment at a day's notice —Ge.prge Saddler, ead groom, on plaintiff being dismissed on riday, asked him what wages were to im, and be answered up till the next day, hich he paid. —His Worship considered the aintiff, by not statiug that he should rente a week’s notice, had forgone any claim I might have, and gave judgment for deLdant without costs.