RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3354, 19 November 1873, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Wednesday, Kovembeu 19. (Before 1. N. Watt, Essq., K.M.) I)Kunkenn ess —Patrick Boyd was lined 5s or twenty-four hours’ imprisonment, with hard labor. Theft. —George Burn was charged with stealing a silver watch, value L2, from the Caledonian Hotel, Walker street.-James Hutton, proprietor of the hotel, stated that thn watch in qmstion was his property, and was kept in the bar, hanging on a nail. Yesterday he was out on business, and on returning home received information which caused him to go to the Caledonia Hotel, Great King street, when a young lady, who was apparently staying there, gave him the watch. He had seen it in his bar the same morning, and had not authorised anyone to remove it. — Mary dnu Hutton, a little girl of eight years of ago, and daughter of last witness, saw the watch hanging in the parlor yesterday, and al-o saw accused take it and put it iu his pocket and go down the street. Her mother was also iu the room. —Accused said he had not stolen the watch, but had taken it because it belonged to a man named Moore, a “chum” of his.—Sub,-Inspector Mallard asked for a remand, iu order that the young lady who had been mentioned and who had been cautioned to attend might lie subprenaed. Accused was remanded to tomorrow morning. civil. (’ASKS. S’olnmon v. Christian. claim, Kll 4s Gd, for rent and for jewellery supplied. Mr Harris for plaintiff; Mr tout for who admitted owing LJ 7s (id only. rhuntilF elated that up to the beginning of 1572 the

amount of L 7 12s Gd was due to him by defendant for rent of tenement in Maclaggan treT, at a rental of 12s Gd per week. The understanding since that time was that if that amount was paid the rent would be redneed to 10s per week. Defendant had not paid tne old amount, but had (-till only paid lOs per week rent. There was also a claim of 1.3 12s for jewellery, the account for which witn ss had rendered several times. Id d never authorised defendant to repaint or effect any repairs to the building at bis (witne s’s) expense.— Defendant, who is a barber in Maclaggan street, said that he had paid 12s (id per week fur rent, 2s Gd of which per week went to pay the luck account. Thu jewellery account he had paid at the time of getting the articles (o Mr Youn<j, plaintiff’s clerk, He had a cross action, by which he brought plaintiff L 7 15s into his debt for repairs. The repairs be had made to the building were to the ro T, which was blown off, to a window blown in, and paint-ing-all of which plaintiff’s agent (Mr Fellows) said plaintiff woull pay. Mizabeth Christian, wife of defendant, said she was present when Mr Solomon and Mr Fellows agreed to allow for repairs.—Plaintiff, recal'cd, said be had never hoard of any claim by defendant for repairs until this morning. —Judgment was given for the respecti- e defendants in each case, each par;y to pay his own costs. Judgment was given by defau’t in the following cases:—Solomon v. Hubert Hogg, claim LlO 15s, for a gold watch ; Goulsir, PeU, and Co. v. Co tes, claim L 7 12s Id, for a quarter-cask of whiskey. Brogden and Sons v. W. Williams.— Claim 1.52 15s 3', for promissory note for passage and outfit money. Mr Smith appeared for pldntiffs, MrStoutfor defendant. —A. J. Smyth stated that defendant had not started to wo k for tha firm he represented, and that the promissory note was due. —Defendant admitted his signature to the note, and state I that he hail been refused work bv Mr Smyth. —Mr Smyth, in answer to questions by defendant, said that defendant told him he c mid not work on the railway, and that he wanted a clerk’s place ; and that afterwards he entered the police force. Judgment was reserved. Same v. William Carter. —Claim LB3 13s 51, for promissory notes Mr Stout, who appeared for defendant, ploided a general denial.-James Cooper, foreman of works, proved defendant’s signatures to the not-.s.— Mr Stout objected to the stamping of the notes, as they had been stamped after the present action was brought, and there was nothing to prove by whom they had be'n stamped ; and they were also not negotiable not i cing endorsed by plaintiffs. —Mr Smith called Mr James Billing, representative of plaintiffs, who said he acted for the plaintiffs under a power of attorney, and stated that he had cancelled the stamps this morning Mr Smith submitted that as long as the stamps affixed to the notes were cancelled bef re they were adduced in evidence, it was done in due time.—Mr Stout argued that there was not proof of sufficient cancellation, as the Act required that to be d ne by the holder of the bill and there was no proof that -Mr Billing had {lower to do so, as the power of attorney was not adduced iu evidence ; and that the cancellation should have been done on presentment, which was, in this case, on the issue of the summons or on the commencement of the action—not on the hearing, which was really after the commencement of an action. His Worship re served judgment. Brogden and Sons v. Bristou.-Mr Smith for plaintiffs. This was a claim for L 42 3s I (id, arising out of a similar contract. After hearing, judgment was also reserved.