RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4127, 19 May 1876, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Friday, May 19. (Before J. Bathgate, Esq., R.M.)

Judgment was given for plaintiffs by default in the following casesJ. Vezey v. T. Josling, 14 Is sd, for meat supplied ; Cooper v. A. D. Corfield, application for a judgment summons. '

M. Marks v. G. Lumb.—Claim for L4l, on a judgment summons. Mr Stout appeared for plaintiff.-—Defendant contended that the judgment against him had been improperly obtained, and asked for a re-hear-ing.—His Worship said he should have given notice accordingly when judgment was given.—l'efendant was then examined by M r Stout as to his means of payment, and admitted that he had received^the sum of L 62 a week or so before judgment was given against him; also that he had received a salary of Ll6 13s 4d per month.—After consideration his Worship ordered defendant to pay the claim by instalments of L 4 per month; in default to go to prison for thirty days. Sharp v. H. Calder.—Claim Lls, for damages caused by defendant’s horses trespassing on plaintiff’s land, Mr A. Bathgate appeared for plaintiff; Mr Stout for defendant. The same plaintiff also brought a similar action against J. Muir, for LlO damages, and both cases were heard together.—A large number of witnesses gave evidence on each side, after which his * orshipdelivered judgment, sayingthat he hadno doubt damage had been done to plaintiff’s property, but it was a question whose cattle had caused it. Plaintiff discovered the damage on February 3, but had himself created a difficulty by not attempting to find out whose cattle or horses were to blame until now. Nominal damages only would be allowed, viz., LI 10a in Calder’s case, and Ll in Muir’s case, ■with costs.

Boyd and Another v. Thornley.—Claim, L 26 13s 3d, for groceries supplied. Plaintiff was non-suited,