RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3611, 18 September 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Friday, September 18. (Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M.) Drunkenness. Catherine Biggins and John Black were discharged with a caution. CIVIL CASES. Connor v. Frederick Bawden.—Claim L 8 Bs, rent due. Mr .A, Bathgate appeared for plaintiff, who stated that he let a house, his property, to defendant on March 16; but the latter had paid only one week’s rent. Defendant did not appear, and the usual order was granted. D. M. Spedding v. Perriman.—Claim fora promissory note. The amount did not transpire. Judgment was given for plaintiff for amount claimed, by default. Buncev. Deardon.—Claim for work done and money lent. Mr Stout for plaintiffMr G. Cook for defendant. The amount sued for did not transpire, but one item was 21a fid for cash lent by plaintiff in the course of a day’s cruising about public houses with defendant. In cross-examination, plaintiff owned to having drunk six glasses of beer on that occasion, but knew what he was about.

—Henry Clarke, sweep, who was called as a witness, said that on the day in question he was passing the Red Lion Hotel, when plaintiff called him in, asked him to have a drink, and told him he was going to raise bis rent 4s. Deardon exclaimed at this, and said witness must have a drink with him on tho strength of it. Witness did so; and then, aiter another drink or so going, defendant borrowed half-a-crown of plaintiff, the latter saying “That’s 2ls 6d you have borrowed, Deardon.” Defendant replied, “Yes; if yen come round in the morning I’ll give it to you.” —Mr took ; How many glasses of beer did you have ? Witness : Didn’t have no beer at all. I don’t drink beer. They say that beer goes to the head, but I think it goes to the feet, as I’ve got the gout, so 1 don’t drink it. —Defendant, a car penter, said he borrowed only 7a 6d »•£ plaintiff. Witness had been drinking, but was coming round at that time, for he bad two glasses of soda water and ginger beer His Worship held the as plaintiff had a witness. The other items were disputed, but judgment was given for plaintiff for LI 5s 3d, with costs Johnson v. Lynch.—Mr Mo vat rsked his Worship to award costs to plaintiff in this case, an action for a promissory note, in which judgment was recently given for plaintiff.—Mr C. R. Chapman opp sed the application.—His Worship thought he had power under the 55th section of the Act to award costs, and that this was a case which justified such a course. Costs awarded accordingly.

Jane Monson v, David Tapping.—Claim for house rent. The amount did not transpire. Mr M‘Keay appeared for plaintiff, for whom judgment was given, with costs. Hopcroft v. Muir.—Claim L 29 19s, balance of account for removing a cottage from Hope street to the Glen. Mr Barton appeared for plaintiff; Mr Stamper, jun., for defendant. [Left sitting ]