RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, AHAURA.

Grey River Argus, Volume IX, Issue 674, 14 May 1870, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, AHAURA.

V I >;S?STJESDAY, MAY 12. I before Warden Whitefoord.) M Thos. Tracey v. Leathwood, Napoleon. 1 — A claim for LlO 6s 8d for beer, cordials, ] &c. This case had been ad journed from last court day, to enable the name qf an J alleged partner, Mra Connsellj to 'be inserted in the summons, and also to enable plaintiff to produce certain books. 'Defendant admitted a liability of L 5. The plaintiffs books were closely scrutinised by the Court, and defendant attempted to explain certain discrepencies in the; debit and credit entries. Evidence was also called to prove the price agreed on for the articles. The Bench, in giving judgmeu^ said plaintiffs books were kept in a very unsatisfactory manner ; there were ialtefations and erasures in the entries, which had not been by any means clearly explained away by plaintiff. IE people brought their books into court in such a state as to be unintelligible even to the parties who kept them, they must take - { the consequences. Judgment would be j for plaintiff for the amount confessed, L 5, and. had defendant not admitted jher liability to that amount, judgment would ; have gone in her favor, . on the evidence -?i which had been brought before, the court. Fraser v. Johnson: Mr Drury for plain? tiff ; Mr Davis for defence : 'A " Judgment Summons.— Defendant was examined as to his ability to satisfy the judgment. He said he had a claim at Callaghan's, but it was paying, nothing. His share was transferred to John Steven^ is security for , their supplies while ciming the race; he was to receive 'L3 per week out of the proceeds of the share until ,the mortgage on it was cleared off, but he had not made a living oat of it yet. In cross-examination •by Mr Drury, defendant said that although he had been at the court at the" Ahaura several times he always had to borrow the money to pay his expenses. He had been "tight" but not drunk on several occasion, but it was always at other people's expense. The Bench was satisfied that defendant could have paid the debt long ago if he were inclined to do' So, aiid an order was made that judgment titfrald be satisfied in 48 hours, or that defendant be committed to prison for fourteen days. A. M'Donald y. Patrick Keane.— No appearance of plaintiff. Case struck out. Defendant applied for costs,and the Cou|t allowed him LI. < Donal v. Smith.— -Claim for L 5 19s. Judgment confessed. Defendant was ordered to pay li}, per week until the judgment was satisfied. James Methern v. Antonio, Lardi. ' Claim LI 19is for tolls on the Napoleon track. There was an item of 18s charged for six pack horses on 23rd March which defendant disputed. He said he did not use Methern's track on that day. Verdict for 21s with costs. Joseph Woolfe v. Ed. Donovan. — Claim for L 45, the price of a share in a water-race afc Antonio Flat. The sjilenote was put in, by which ,it appeared; the money was to be paid out of the proc|e§» of the gold which came put of any claim or ground commanded and worked with the water in the race. Plaintiff said he never received any money for the share, although he knew that 2H> weight of gold had ceitainly been taken out of the claim by defendant and his party! Defendant admitted that 440z of gold had been obtained since the 16th October last, but jit was all swallowed up in expenses. *!£he Bench was of opinion that the ' debt was proved by the document put in by defendant. Defendant should not have continued to work the share for such a length of time, when he was satisfied that it was not likely to pay.; He should have given the share back to plaintiff, especially as he was willing to take it back. ; Judgment for amount claimed, with costs. Hr Davies appeared for the plaintiff; Mr Drnry for the defence. Daniel Muldoon v. the Bailiff of the Court.— An interpleader summons; / r Mt Davies appeared to support: the original judgment, and Mr Drury for' the present plaintiff. At the last sitting of the .Court a person named Antonio Domingo'obtained a judgment , against Jane Leathwood, an hotelkeeper at Napoleon. The Bailiff, took possession of . the Casino de Yenise at that place and proceeded to sell, when plaintiff laid claim to /the prbpeffer under an agreement of absolute sail. Plaintiff claimed that he bought 'the property for L4O on 22nd March, which was some time previous to the 5 date of 1 lf£ mingo's judgment being obtained. He paid fori it partly in cash, given at different times, and partly by a contra account which he had against defendant for bread supplied to her. Thefe%e're nunierotia and material discrepancies in the evidence of this witness arid that given by Mrs Leathwood, as to the amount of in'oney paid to the latter for the house, and also as to the manner in which the alleged payments were. made. An immense amount of evidence was taken, 1 and ultit mately the Court gave judgment in ; fav6r Of the Bailiff, and ordered the sale to > proceed, with full costs against Muldoonv The progress of the case was watched>wltl interest by a crowded court,, as ; the decision will affect the title to the real ownership of numerous so-called hotels at Napoleon and other places. ' • !., /, Volich v. Daly.— Judgment by, default forLU 6s. t The Courfcadjourned to the, 26th iMtp