RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT GREYMOUTH.

Grey River Argus, Issue 115, 6 October 1866, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT GREYMOUTH.

(Before WJH. Rey|i, Esq., R.M.) Thursday, GJjirroßEß 4. ( /f Montgomery '"v, Martin. — Claim LI 10s. Judgment for plaintiffs^ by default. Sain'e v. Softer and Same v. Geddes. — This was a case involving a dispute as to "whether the parties were or were not partners in a. boat on. the yiver, and in certain speculations in goods. The defendants denied being pojpthtirs, excepting as working the boat 011 shares in the freight. The case occupied the court a long time, and a. good deal of evidence was taken and a voluminous - ; collection of. accounts was put in. The Magistrate reserved his decision, 11, Wilson y, M/Kintey, — Claim L 5. Judg* rf inent for plaintiff by default, ' I Hickey v, O'Brien, — Claim L 6. Judgment I by default. I Williams v, Constantine.— Claim LlB lls, I a 'disputed account,' Judgment for plaintiff * for L 9 12s. , 1 Montgomery v, Bailey x Nichol and Co.—^ B Claim lil 15s, for freight on a quantity of 1 wood and iron from Red Jack** Creek- to, m Greymouth. Plaintiffs case was that he m was instructed by the defendants' agents to fl bring down to Greymouth a quantity of wood fl and iron, which, b,ad previously formed a fl stor? belonging to defendants' at Ked Jacks, jH and. whicj\ had teen; tak?n dp.wn and removed JH by defendants' order. The defendants did ]H not deny the delivery of the materials at j^H Greymouth, but refused to recognise the |H| authority of plaintiff to remove them from Ked Jacks. The parties whom plaintiff referred to as having instructed him to bring the materials to Greymouth had no authority j^Hj Ho do -so, Defendants had simply agreed with them to pull down the store and l^ave^^B it at Red Jacks Creek. Any future arrange-.^^H ments as to its disposal were to be left to the^^H defendants. The Magistrate dismissed fchd^Mi case, as the plaintiff could not prove that h<j^Hs had been duly authorised by defendants bring down the things. ■ j^UIM W. H. Harrison y. Lofquisi-^Claim L2^H| on a dishonered promissory note. defendant admitted his liability, but. aske^BMJß that execution might be deferred until action he had against the original holdJ^Hpf 7 of the bill should be decided. The Mag^^HK; trate agreed to suspend execution, on con <^^fi|f|' tion that the defendant commenced action without"' l clay.