A STORY OF A WEDDING DINNER.

Grey River Argus, Issue 129, 8 November 1866, Page 2

A STORY OF A WEDDING DINNER.

. # , (From the West Coad Times. ). In the Resident Magistrate's Court at. Hokitika on Thursday last the following case was heard : — Cg&vrjßi v. bostick. This was an ' action to obtain payment of LS6, being the cost of a wedding dinner and money lent. Mr Rees for plaintiif, and Mr Button for defendant. Mr Rces opened the case, with a very humorous speech, and called the plaintiff, who, on being sworn, deposed that he knew the defendant and that he had been staying at his hotel, M'here he fell in love with the servant girl and was married. He had ordered witness, to prepare, a first-class supper. It cost witness over L2O. There were abouc 14 persons at the supper. He had seen his wife lend clefendeut L3O. By Mr. Button : The money was given to defeudent. in the billiard room. He did not know what the defendant niantcd the money for.' The loan was before the celebration of the nupitals. Dr. Ro^etti.and a few other friends y/ere present at the supper. Mrs Quadri was the next witness, and she deposed that the defendant had ordered the supper on the occasion of his wedding. She thought L2O was not too much for a supper of that description. The defendant asked her for the loan of L3O, and she went into her room and brought, the same. She gave it to him. By Mr Button:" 'She was not at the. supper table. It was not customary to charge by the head on these occasions, but by the lump. She had seen a ham, some poultry, and other viands on the table. She didn't, know whether the ham had been eaten or not, they could not have masticated the bones. She had seen the letters written by the defennant to his wife. She had .advised the servant girl not to marry defendant, as he had a wife in Melbourne. She was surprised at the girl marrying him. She never thought that 'his attentions were honourable. She never desired to get up a sham wedding in order to make the defendant spend his money. Frank Cesston, being sworn, stated that he had seen Mrs Quadri give the defendant some money. He could not say how much. The transaction took place in. the billiard room. Miss Fleming deposed that she recollected the marriage of the defendant. She had acted as bridesmaid. She was at the supper. She was barmaid at the plaintiff's hotel. The champagne, wines, &c, were ordered by defendant. It was a magnificent spread— the same sort as she would like to have at her wedding. By Mr Button: The defendant's marriage was celebrated in the evening. There we^.'abp^t 12 persons present,* and they all imbibed pretty freely! She did not refuse to take, a glass of wine, perhaps more than one or 'two, The entries in the book produced were in her handwriting. She cpukluot assign any reason for t]ie leaf being

torn out immediately preceeding the "entiy of the champagne, &c. She had selected a clean page' in which to enter defendant's account. The wine was drank in the supper room and parlor. In the morning she presented the defendant with his ' bill; He never objected to any of the items. One of the guests was then called, and in reply to a question from Mr Button, replied that" he was at the supper, and the morning after his head felt very bad, in fact. he. was fit for nothing that day. J. A. Carr stated that he, had served the summons upon tlie defendant;,! ■ and that lie remarked "Ijhat it was all right "... and that the plaintiff" need not have been in such a hurry about it." William Blanc'; ; S being sworn, deposed that he was by pro- S fession a French cook. He had prepared ', the siipper. As an experienced cook, he W thought that L2O was a reasonable charge. W By Mr Button : He could particularise all « the "good thing.'! There -were two pair J fowls, four pair tame pigeons, one ham, one ;1 dozen jellies, qne si|gar cajie about 12 inches high,'- gome jam tarts, a 'few oranges 'ancU^j apples. It was customary to have dessert 1 a^.sr supper. He thought that the spread ■■* was too good for such a few partakers. Tq i Sfrßees; He had heen paid for his services j by plaintiff. He had received L 2 15s.Jg This closed the plaintiif s case. Mr ButtonS then addressed the Court, declaring thattkjfiH charge's were most exorbitant— that tlffl were nqt'inore than 12 people at the sup-n^Bffi and the plaintiff had the modesty tochj^H| the deffintjant I^2o for a very indiffe^^^B supper, and that,' to,' exclusive of drj^^n He knew that many -were \n the hal^^H paying their'attentions to the ( 'blu9HH barmaids/ and that some were often, ot^HH impulse of the moment, " and xinder thdj^Bß iluence of wine, led to make proposals frequently entail much ai^er misery nB wery few dinners given in Hpkitikalß^H what might be attended by the expendjlgj^j ture of a guinea. There was somethiiigl|p^ his mind so fabulous in the evidence of Jifi^v" Fleming, "the bashful bridesmaid," tlu\pij!i| bottles of wine and champagne shoulilmve T 'i been drank by 12 or 1.3 persons. They must J have been great tipplers. He did not Ip, 1 lievej and he was instructed to state, that * nothing approaching tliat qu iritity had ever, been supplied. H would^bring evidence to show that Mr Quadri lent the defendant L 3, and not L3O. The learned counsel cpncluded by stating that it was only a dodge, to get the defendant to srend his money ; the plaint*!' little thinking that he would carry away the girl, and make her the partner of his joys and troubles. The defendant, Raymond Bostick, was then sworn, and said he. was a digger. He knew plaintiff and his wife. He had married a girl who was formerly a servant at • their hotel. He had given orders for a quiet supper. He never ordered more than half a dozen of chan • pagne. He had borrowed L 3 from M;s Quadri, and no more. She had asked him to buy her a brooch, saying that it would only cost L 7 10s, and she would go halves in the cost. He bought the brooch, and Mrs Quadri still had it. He had never spoken to Miss Fleming about the account. He did not think that anything like 30 bottles of wine and champagne were drank at the supper. By Mr Rces :He came to, town for the purpose of being married. He neither invited Father M'liirr nor Dr. 80---1 setti to the supper. He was certain that ho had iicver told the barmaid that the account was quite correct. .He thought it was a very dear wedding, and hoped it wor.ld in t occur again. The defendant's wife was then called, and deposed that she had been a servant in the plaintiffs emplo;. She • married the defendant on the sth OctobiT. last. She did not know how much wine had been imbibed, but she did not- tl ink there had been a great deal, as there were only nine or ten present. She knew nothing about the. supper; it was not first class. She never heard her husband give any instructions concerning it. At this stage Mr Button applied* that the Court might be adjourned for twenty minutes, to enable him to produce " expert- '<L evidence." His .Worship adjourned the Court for twenty minutes. On its resuming the learned conusel stated that he had been unable to procure the attendance of any experts, as the were all busy ; he would', however, recall Mr Quadri. The plaintiff wss then recalled. Mr Button :Do you consider. LI a bo.ttle a fair and rens mable charge fes champagne ? Witness : I have been in the' Colony four year?, and have never charged' " less. Mr Button : Will you swear that is. the usual price ! Witness : I believe so. Mr Button :Do you not know ? Witness : I can't say. His. Worship : You ought tp know seeing that you are in the trade. Witness i Ll a bottle is my charge. Mr Button : It is a most unreasonable oiip. Mr Kees having addressed the Court, his Worship said he had no doubt but that the defendant had received the LMO, and if he chose to celebrate, lus nuptials in such a costly and extravagant manner he must be made to pay for the same.' The judgment would' therefore be for the^ plaintiff for the amount churned and qost^,