Resident Magistrate's Court.

Hawke's Bay Times, Issue 1529, 28 November 1873, Page 30

Resident Magistrate's Court.

TUESDAY, 25th NOVEMBER. Before H. B. Sealy, Esq., B.M. Redstone v. Oolello.

Claim of £ls 19s Bd, for goods sold and delivered.—Judgment for the amount claimed, and £ll7s costs. Milligan v. Topping.

Claim of £2O, value of five tons of potatoes sold and delivered. Mr Lascelles appeared for plaintiff ; Mr Lee for defendant. The potatoes, it appeared, were ordered from a sample and delivered. Nearly a month after delivery defendant wrote to plaintiff, complaining that the potatoes were worthless, and requesting him to remove them ; otherwise he would sell them at plaintiff's risk. Milligan declined to take them hack, and defen* dant sold them by auction, where they fetched 10s per ton. In his evidence the defendant said he did not know who bought the potatoes; but being pressed in cross-examination he stated that he had bought them himself. A good deal of evidence was taken, the plaintiff's witnesses testifying that the potatoes were sound and according to sample. Defendant disputed the statement of the other witnesses that a month had passed before he complained of the goods; he said it was not more than a week. The Resident Magistrate said that the balance of testimony was in favor of the plaintiff; the evidence of Milligan and his two witnesses had apparently been given in a straightforward manner, and the evidence of the defendant on the other hand was very unsatisfactory. Judgment for amount claimed, and £3 10s costs. Hart v. Lowry. Claim of £3O 2s. Mr Lee for plaintiff: Mr Lascelles for defendant. The plaintiff had been engaged by defendant as station cook, at weekly wages, and on the 11th of last January, an annual engagement was entered into, for £52 per annum. According to the plaintiff, this engagement was terminated at the end of ten months by mutual consent; but according to Mr Beamish (manager for the defendant), the plaintiff had got drunk and misconducted himself at the very busiest time of the year, and had refused to perform his ordinary duties. He was an excellent cook, and had generally given satisfaction, but from the 4th to the 11th of the present month he had refused to fulfil his engagement, and another cook had to be engaged. The defendant had no wish to deprive plaintiff of what he had fairly earned ; but considered some penalty should be imposed for the inconvenience and trouble he had occasioned by his breach of agreement.—The Magistrate considered that the legal effect of plaintiff's conduct would be such as to deprive him of the right to claim any portion of his year's wages ; but there was a good deal of evidence to show that he looked upon the contract as annulled by consent. Had he not been under this belief, he would probably not have persisted in his refusal to perform his duties. He would allow the claim, less £1 for loss of time; but would not allow costs,

Gilpin v. Home. Adjourned case.—-In this case the Resident Magistrate held that the case came within his jurisdiction, the defendant having failed to show a prima facie title. Under the 89th section the defendant, by entering into a bond, had the option of declining to have the case adjudicated in this Court.—Mr Lee, on behalf of the defendant, availed himself of the option, and undertook to give the necessary security. There is a probability that this case will be settled out of Court. WEDNESDAY, 22nd NOVEMBER. Drunkenness. James Cunningham, an old offender, was fined 10s and costs. Two females were also charged with drunkenness; one, not appearing, forfeited her bail of £1: against the other—a native woman—the charge was not pressed. THURSDAY, 27th NOVEMBER. Cases under Crown Grants Act. There being several cases under the above Act, and the Resident Magistrate being also Commissioner of Crown Lands, the Bench was occupied by S. G. Brandon. Esq,, J.P., and R. Stuart, Esq., J.P. J. T. Tylee, Esq., Receiver of Land Revenue, appeared as plaintiff. Tylee v. S. Locke and E. Lyndon, trustees in Te Hapuku's estate.—Claim of £3 15s.—No appearance of defendants.— Judgment by default for amount claimed, and 8s 6d costs. Tylee v. A. Kennedy.—Claim of £3 15s. —No appearance of defendant. Judgment by default for amount claimed, and 8s Gd costs. There was a third case—Tylee v. Michael Bryan, but as it was shown that the defendant was dead, it was not called.