RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Grey River Argus, Volume VI, Issue 386, 4 July 1868, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thursday, JuiiY 2. (Before W. H. Revell, Esq., 8.M.) George Brown v. Colviile Patterson. — This was a claim of L 33, being half the, amount of money received by defendant gn plaintiff's account. Mr Perkins appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Guinness, for the defendant. The plaintiff stated that he was mates with the defendant at the New River, when defendant went to. work on a road at LI a week. They agreed that defendant should work* on the road, plaiutitf should work the claim, and between them they would go halves : and put on a man in the claim, each of them paying half his wages. He gave the defendant LlO out of the profits of the claim which kept him while he was on tha road. He paid the wages man his half of hia wages, and his board was paid out of the gold. The defendant had told him. that lie had earned, L66 on the road, but he had not received a single shilling of it, so they settled up between them, and ho agreed to loose his share of the money on thi3 condition ; but he had since learned that the defendant had received the money, and he now sued for his sharu. They dissolved partnership at Nelson Creek, and everything was settled up between them except this L 6 which, they agreed should be drawn in one lump sum, the defendant being kept out of the the profits of the claim in the meantime. Charles Meehan stated that he had recently a contract for cutting a road which he gave over to the defendant and other two men. When everything wag reckoned up between him and the defen- : dant he was due him L 66, and he paid . him L6l in goods and money. The balance, was not called for, as. defendant did not fulfil his contract George Harliog said, that on the last court day defendant admitted to him that he received Ll3 10a, from Meehan in cash and LJ6 \n goods. For the defence, Paterson said he wag Brown's mate in a claim, into which he bought him a share and paid for it, Afterwards he went to make the road and put a man in his place in the clam, who, had not been paid. All he had received from Meehan was Ll3 10s in cash forwages, and piece-work, but he neve? received a farthing on account of the con-. ; tract, The floods he received came from I Coates' store in town while he was on the, road. He received LlO from the plaintiff, . but he (plaintiff) kept the gold out of tha claim belonging to both shares for sixteen weeks, He had squared up with the plaintiff, but then the L 66 was never men-, tioned, as he had not received all the money. He had frequently told the plaintiff he had received the Ll3 10s in cash, but not the amount of the goods, aa he did &ot know the amount of that account. If he had received the money the plaintilf would have been welcome to, his share of it. Counsel for the parties, having addressed the Bench, the Magis-. trate said that from the evidence before* him he would give judgment for the, plaintiff, L 25 and costs, Shannon v. Lofty, -r-Claim of- L 2 19s, for goods supplied, Judgment by default, with costs, Crogan v. J, B. Clarke^—^Clajm. of. LI ss, the hire of a horse ordered by tha defendant to take him to Hokitika^ \>\\\ which he never called for, tjudgmjenjfc b$ default, with costs. ' „_' Friday, Jui^y 2, Drunkenness. — Alexander Stut^, foi? this offence,, was fined ss ; and John Cor--bett, for having been disorderly as well aa ■ drunk, was fined 10s, Unregistered Dog.— Joseph William^ , was charged with keeping an unregistered, ,-t dog. He did not appear, and was fined : 20s arid costs, . Sly Grog Selling,— Charles M'Donald was charged with selling and exposing fot sale certain spirituous liquors in an unlicensed house at the Limestone Diggings, Saltwater District, on the 25th ult. The police sergeant in charge of the district said the defendant kept a shanty, where it was reported liquor was sold. When he passed the door he saw a bottle and glasses on the table and a keg in a corner. He went in and found that the bottle and keg both contained rum, and the glasses smelt strongly of it. The defen-> dant came in, and on being asked if bet had spirits in the house denied it. The sergeant then seized the spirits. The defendant now said he was working in % claim, and living in the hut with his wife arid family. The last time he was in town he brought up the rum for the use of himself and mates. The Magistratesaid that under the circumstances of the case he would not inflict a heavy penalty^ in the hope that it would be a caution to. the defendant. The fine would be L 5.