RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume II, Issue 43, 24 April 1862, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

(Before J. Curling, and J. A. Smith, Esquires.) A. WML 17. Roberts v. Superintendent of Hawke's Bay. This was a claim for ATS 125., as compensation for plaintiff’s dismissal from the service of the Government without notice. Amount paid into Court, with costs, Gs. Symes v. same. A claim for ATI 11s., on similar grounds. Raid into Court, with costs, Cs. McSweeney v. Newton. Plaintiff sought to recover ATS 155., for timber sold and delivered. Settled out of Court. Davern v. Ferrers. Defendant was summoned to answer a charge of allowing five pigs at large in the town, against the provisions of the 11th clause of the Wellington Impounding Ordinance, Session 2, No. 8. He stated that his premises , had been destroyed by the late lire, that the pigs had escaped, and that he had never been able to recover them since. Under the circumstances, the Dench dismissed the charge, stating, however, that they were determined to enforce the law in Cijses where pigs were allowed to run about, And that persons should be punished for these offences whenever an opportunity was afforded by the law, and that the police were acting very properly in summoning persons who suffered their pigs, Ac., to go at large in the town. Apeil 22. Buchanan v. Boddinatnn and Barnaby. This case was an action brought by Air. J. Buchanan, of Napier, flour merchant, against Messrs. Roddington and Barnaby, of Waipurcku, for the recovery of AT9 155., the price of certain flour and maize sold by the plaintiff to the defendants, who pleaded payment, Mr. C. Allen appeared for plaintiff, stating the case to he simply whether the payment hy defendants to Mr. T. IT. Fitzgerald, which he admitted, could be considered as a payment to plaintiff. He called

The plaintiff, who proved that towards the end of last year he made an arrangement with Mr. Fitzgerald to purchase .flour for the mill, which was to be ground by Mr. Fitzgerald, delivered to plaintiff, and sold by him ; the proceeds of sale to be applied by him, first, in repaying himself his outlay and interest, then towards his commission on purchase and sale, and the balance to be paid to Mr. Fitzgerald. He proved the sale to defendants on the 25th November, and the 18th January last, and the delivery to their order. The sale was on credit, at the expiration of which he sent them the account and applied for payment, to which they replied, by letter, promising to call and settle the claim, but did not do so. On bis again sending, they stated that they bad paid* the amount to Mr. Fitzgerald. The plaintiff further proved that Mr. Fitzgerald had no other interest in the flour than that beforementioned, and was not his jiartner, but acted as bis agent for sale, and was bound to account to him immediately for all cash payments made to him, but that he bad not done so here. He produced several Hawke’s Pay papers, showing weekly advertisements of flour in his own name. Mr. Poddington, one of the defendants, stated that be was not aware that Mr. Fitzgerald was not the owner, and that he bad bought the flour of him without any knowledge of the plaintiff in the matter ; that on the date of sale Mr. Fitzgerald owed him .£ls 10s., and on purchasing the flour be set off the £ls 10s. against so much of the flour, and paid Mr. Fitzgerald the balance, £4 10s.; and that on receiving the plaintiff’s account be saw Mr. Fitzgerald on the subject, who promised to arrange the matter. On cross-examination be admitted having read the paper and seen Mr. Buchanan’s advertisement, but he did not know lie was interested in Fitzgerald’s sales. He gave the £4 10s. to Mr. Dolbel to give Mr. Fitzgerald after receiving plaintiff’s account; but Polbel had given it back to him a few days afterwards. He kept Fitzgerald’s cheque which he held for the £ls 10s., and did not give it to Mr. Fitzgerald on the settlement with him, he'kept it until the settlement of the matter. He could give no reason why lie wrote promising plaintiff to pay at the time he had settled with Fitzgerald. Here the Court stopped Mr. Allen, and gave judgment for the plaintifl for the amount claimed, and costs.