RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4103, 21 April 1876, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Friday, April 21. (Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M)

Patterson v, Reece. —Claim, 14, on a judgment summons. Defendant was ordered to pay the amount in instalments of 20s per mouth. *

Clark v Walsham.—Claim, L 8 13s, cash lent, Judgment was given for plaintiff for the amount claimed, defendant to pay it in instalents of 10s per week. Judgment was given for plaintiffs by default in the following cases : —Wilson v M'Grath, claim L 7, for goods supplied;

Krkpatrick, Glending. and Co ▼. Schofield, 6d vt or , 100118I 00118 applied; Hutchinson v Morton, L 3 16s, for goods supplied; and, same v Dickenson, L2 16a. Kwong Ling Wing y Vincent (master of the ship Gloucester). - Claim, L 72 Os Bd, for damage to and non-delivery of packages of merchandise brought from Hong Kongm the Gloucester. Mr A. Bathgate appeared for the plaintiff, Mr Haggitt for defendant, who paid L 4 7s into Court, and pleaded that the rice had suffered damage by the perils of the sea, and that the other goods were ready for delivery.—Evidence in this case was tinned from yesterday, the following witnesses for the defence being examined;— Capt. Vincent, J. W. Cummins (marine surveyor), J.thußosenberg (lighterman), Thomas King (lighterman), Charles Smith (lighterman), P. C. Neill (agent for the Gloucester), James Troue (the second mate of the vessel).-—His Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for Ll9 5b Bd, including the amount paid into Court. Co ehan v. Thomby.— Claim, L2O Bs, amount due for board and lodging. Defendaut did not appear, and judgment was given for plaintiff, by default, with costs. A.Hyslopv.theCityOorporation.—Claim, LIOO for services rendered as valuation Mr Stewart for plaintiff; Mr Stout, instructed by Alessrs Smith and Anderson, for the defence. Mr Stewart contended that as L 62 10s bad been offered to the plaintiff, the question for the Court to decide was what would be a fair amount between the Ll2 40s and LIOO. Several experts were examined, who swore that LIOO was a fair claim. His Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for L 62 10b, with all costs, save those of the witnesses called to prove the rates of commission.