RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3541, 29 June 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Monday, June 29. (Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M.) Drunkenness.— George' Watt, Michael 0 Keefe, and Duncan Carr were each fined lOs, with the option of three days’ imprisonment ; John Bower, sixteen years of ages, having been lectured an bis conduct in starting a bad career so young in life, was discharged with a caution.

A Disturber or the Drama.— -Henry Pearson was charged with conducting himself in the Princess’s Theatre at ten minutes past ten on Saturday night in a manner cal ciliated to provoke a breach of the peace. Prisoner pleaded that he was “ tipsy.”—His Worship: Where did you get the liquor ? Were you the worse of liquor when you went in ’—Prisoner : Yes.—His Worship : Then if you were drunk why did they take your mpney ?—Prisoner replied that he was unable to answer the question. -His Worship (addressing prisoner) : I cannot punish you If tqp lessees, whoever they are, allow drunken men to gain admission to the theatre they do wrong. They should not allow drunken men to get in. You may go, and mind you don’t come back here again. Don’t go to the theatre when you are drunk, even though they do take your money. You are discharged. CIVIL CASES. Livingston v. Spence.—Claim Lls, for breach of contract in the sale of 100 oonis of wood. Mr Stout for plaintiff; Mr Barton for defendant.—For the de ence it was c ntended that the contract was obtained by fraud, defendant being insensibly drunk at the time it was made, and that it was consequently null and void. Mr Barton submitted, and cited in favor of his argument that it did not matter’in the least whether the party with whom the contract was made was aware that the other was drunk, as both must be of a consenting mind. He understood that a contract meant that both parties were consenting te something mutually made between them. The mark attacked to the contract was as ’’drunken” a dash as he had seen for some time, (Laughter.)— His Worship considered that there was no fraud, assessed the damages at L 5, and allowed defendant time to meet the amount.

Judgment was given by default, with costs, m the following cases Wilson r M‘Gregor, claim LI4 17s, for goods sup', plied; Hutten v. Thomson, LI JOs • and Same v. Snail, L 6 I3s, for board and lodging.