RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4137, 31 May 1876, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Wednesday, May 31. I (Before T. A. Hansford, Esq., R.Hj). r . Lawrie v. M. Mosely.—Claim L 10; dour weeks’ salary as; canvasser and remuneration for other services rendered to the ‘Otago licensed Victuallers’ Gazette.’ Mr 'Stout appeared for plaintiff ;.-Mr Cook-fbrde-fendant, who paid L2 10s into Court, aid<| pleaded that that amount and L2los already paid to plaintiff was sufficient remuneration, .there haying been no eqg^jmbnt;— After a considerate amount of e.Videh{» had been given his. Worship gave judgment for the full amount claimed, with cents,' Saying that L2los per . week was little -chough salary for a man; who hid done the literary and other work plaintiff had done. It was perfectly absurd for defendant to think that Ll per week would be fair remuneration, and if plaintiff had claimed a muchlarger amount it was probable he wooldUhaVe obtained judgment for it. £ ij Judgment wenjb for plaintiffs dbfault in the following cases :—Macasaey and Kettle v. M‘Kenzie Brothers, claim L 96 12s gd, for services rendered; Briscoe hnd Co. y; E. J. Chamberlain, L 9 7s 2d, on a judgment sum mons (amount to be paid in monthly instil- r ments of L2 eachin, default,, seven days’ imprisonment) ; P. Byrne y. John Perry; L.6 3s 7d (to. be paid within fourteen days, cr fourteen days’ imprisonment); Clarke and Templeton v. John Nightingale, Ll 14a, for coal supplied.;: Charles.Nunnv. H. Mueller, Llol9s, for work done ; Low and Ctt-Y, Fuell and Co., Ll3 16s, for gppds supplied; P. Momby v, James Duraton/Ld los 2d; Guthrie and Larnach y. K de Montalk* L 5 9s, for goods supplied; H&man Nashelski v, W. B. Long, L4O; Hainan Nashtlski v. Long and Co., L 25. ■ Dura ton v. Momby. r—Claim, L2 17s 6d. This was a cross-action, and plaintiff was non-suited. ;i -

[Left sitting.]