RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4050, 18 February 1876, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Fbiday, February 19, (Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M.) # R- L. Sparrow and Co v. T5. • e?g (Tokoraai-nro).—-Claim, L4o 7s Bd, for' dishonored bill Mr Stewart .appeared for plaintiff, Mr A Bathgate for defendant, who admitted hein* indebted to plaintiff, but not on thi* bill. —From plaintiff’s evidence it appeared that when the bill was dishonored, he d- bited the defendant’s aooooant wrh the-atnount; payments on account of which had been made, bis Worship adjourned the case till Monday, to enable plaintin to produce his books. went for plaintiffs by defau t in the following oases:-M‘Donnell v. Hammond, clama Lilas, on a judgment summons; .-anda v. Tuer, L 4 Is 6, for work and labor done ; Colonial Bank of New Zealand v. George L 4 5, diah no.ed bill; Same v. M Kenzie Brothers, L7318s 3d (against defendant John M/Keaae only, the other defendant not having been served with a summons); M George v -Elder,L6 6s, for goods supplied; Coulson v. Mitchell, L 4 4s 4i; Hayman and C V il TeaßUe ir^ 3 lld ’ goodß Bu PPbed. Wallace v. M'Meckan.-Glaim L3O, damages sustained through trespass of defendant’s dogs °?. a knd and through numbers of plaintiff * sheep being worried by the said does —Mr Aldridge appeared for plaintiff; Mr de l endaut » who pleaded not indebted. —William Knox, bootmaker, said on thw day mentioned m the plaint he saw a dog chasimr sheep in plaintiff’s paddock. The dog belonged to defendants son—George "Wallace, plaintiff, Bal iv e oo ad . or , three months azo 230 sheep worth 22s each in his paddock. . One Monday since defendant’s dogs got into the paddock and worried the eheep, scatternjg ihetn all about the neighborhood. Witness was three days searching for the missing _ sheep, and eventually Idst twenty-six of them.—Defendant’s son was calkd to give evidence for plaintiff, but merely said that his father had no dogs, and that bis own dog did not worry the -beep, - John Clarke said he saw a dog like ’H'Meckan’s dog worrvmg the sheep. M’Meckan’a son, the last was with the rio,r. though not in the same padd ek ; npf tct he had three dogs with him. Orosa-examined: Only one dog was in among the sheep, and that only for two e n teep ran of tlie paddock.—Wiliam Wallace, plaintiff’s son, said he aw defendant’s on with a do<* like one be saw in his father’s paddock. ° hj [Lefi sitting.]