RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3362, 28 November 1873, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

FIU DAI, NoVKMI)KH 2S. (Before T. N. Watt, Esq., K.M.) Diu'NKhnnkss. — William Kelly was fined ss, or twenty-four hours. Assault with a Kxu’R.Francis Charles South was charged with having, on the 14th iust., attempted to stall Constable Vernon with a, knife. Accused pleaded not guilty, and asked for a remand, in order to subprena Dr iiulme. -Sub-Inspector Mallard also asked that accused might be remanded for eight days to give him an opportunity to leave the country, saying that, in the event of accused making preparations to go away, the police woidd withdraw the charge.--Accused was remanded till to-morrow, CIVIL CASHS. Pearce v. Abbot.-Claim, D 254, reduced to 1/100 to bring the claim witliiu the jurisdiction of the Court, for services rendered, and LlO for additional services. Mr F. lv. Chapman for plaintiff, Mr Stout for defendant. —William i’eardon Pearce, contractor, stated that in October last he had business transactions with defendant in connection with work for the Mount Ida head-race. Witness had tendered, his tender had been accepted, part of tiie work had been done, and he had thrown up the contract in consequence of the badness of the weather. Had a perfect knowledge of the ground, and made out the quantities for defendant. The usual payment for this was l;j per cent. Fixing the quantities requires an intimate knowledge of the ground. Defendant Ims entered upon the works in pursuance of witness’s contract, taking advantage of his calculations. Un speaking to defendant about tendering, witness told him that 21 per cent, was the amount to be deposited, but found out afterwards that the printed clause, fixing 10 per cent, as the deposit, had not been erased, as in other tenders. Defendant thereupon said, as witness knew the officials he should endeavor to get the percentage reduced. After a great ileal of trouble witness got it reduced to five per cent., for which he charged LlO, a, very reasonable amount*—Cross-examined : Witness understood that himself and defendant were to be partners in the contract, and then defendant would not have to pay him for his services ; but as defendant repudiated the partnership witness sued him for commission. Defendant did not offer witness a mile or two of the contract for himself, hut did say he was careless about tendering, and asked witness if lie could get some one else to go in with. George O’Brien, civil engineer, said, ou looking at a drawing attach to the contract, lie would be unable to take out the quantities for the contract without seeing the ground. Tenderers generally tender according to the quantities furnished by a man who makes a business of estimating quantities, to whom the unsuccessful tenderers give a small (lunccnr, and the successful one gives U per cent, on the amount. If the same man also fixed the prices he would be entitled to another l.j per cent. Counsel for plaintiff' then read a letter from Messrs Macassey and Co., demanding the amount claimed, for plaintiff, and also an answer to it from defendant, in which the latter stated that he “ had never had any business connection whatever” with plaintiff, and “ therefore was at a loss to understand the letter.’’---Charles Abbott, defendant, said he had spoken with plaintiff about the contract, but declined to tender for it with him, although plaintiff gave him a tender form filled up with the word “ We.” Plaintiff then asked if he could get a portion of the contract, and witness said lie would give him a mile or two. Witness received notice that 10 per cent, deposit should have been paid instead of 2.j, and, ou seeing Mr Bastings with reference to it, that gentleman said “ tiie Government had been no lmuihng' , ed by Pearce and characters of that sort that they determined to make the deposit payable 10 per cent., so as to get respectable people to tender.” Witness managed to get the Government to reduce the deposit to five percent., but it was not owing to plgintiff’s exertions. Anybody could take out the quantities in a quarte,r-of au-hoiir. — Cross-examined : Plaintiff was not considered a respectable contractor, but still witness let the tender go in in plaintiff’s handwriting, and afterwards gave him part of the contract, but the latter was out of pure charity.--John Turnhull, grocer, produced a letter from plaintiff, in which it was alleged that he was partner with defendant in a DIG,OOO contract. -This closed the case, plaintiff referring his Worship to the case of Burn v. Miller, I Taunton, 715, as hearing on this matter. Judgment was reserved. Morse v. Paterson. In this case, which was heard on Wednesday last, his Worship gave judgment to the effect that he thought the trespass had been clearly proved ; hut that, looking at the nature of the evidence, nominal damages only should be given. Judgment for plaintiff for 10s and costs. John Sihbald v. Hugh Sinnamon. -Claim, D2J 17s 2d, for moneys paid on defendant’s behalf. Judgment for jilaintilf by default for amount claimed, witli costs.