RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Kumara Times, Issue 588, 15 August 1878, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Thursday, August 15. [Before M. Price, Esq., R.M.]

! Breach op the Bye-Laws. —Otto , W. Anderson was charged with allow- : iug his chimney to take fire, contrary ' to the Bye-Laws of the Borough. Defendant pleaded not guilty, and stated (hat his servant, in lighting a fire in . the stove, had used paper saturated with kerosene. It was put out in a minute or two. His Worship, after hearing the evidence of the Secretary to the Fire Brigade, who had been present at the fire, said that this case was not one of neglect or carelessness, but he thought the_ Police had done quite right in bringing it before the Court, as the chimneys in this towh were dangerously close to the buildings, and should be looked after. In this instance, he should dismiss the case with a caution. CIVIL CASES. M'Mahon v. Sticklers.—Claim £1 for money lent. Judgment for plaintiff, wi'h costs of Court. M‘ln tosh v. Hamilton.'—Claim £5. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs of Court. Ken, Arno’t, and Co, v, Hodges Claim ; £4, for advertising. Judgment for plaintiffs, with costs of Court. Selous v, Shaw.—Claim £5 6s «d. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs of Court. Coate-s v. Ryan.—Mr Perkins with Mr Hawkins appeared fa* the plaintiff. This was an action to mover possession of the pre nises of which the defendant was a tenant and which he (the defend-

ant) refused to give up, although the plain tiff, who had a mortgage over the property-had sold it by public auction, and, having bought it in him-elf, could not get possession. After hearing the evidence of the plaintiff, which the defendant admitted, but asked for time to remove his family, the Court ordered the premises to be given up to the plaintiff' on the 29th inst. The defendant to pay costs of Court, one witness 10s, and professional costs £1 Is.

Pavidson and Co. v. M‘Lean.— Claim, £3 3s 6d. Mr Perkins for plaintiff’. Judgment for plaintiffs, with one witness 15s for coach fare, £1 Is professional co-ts, and costs of Court. Cuming and Co., v. Bnrke. —Claim, £ll 15s. Mr Hawkins for plaintiff. This was a judgment summons and as the defendant did not appear and it was proved he was in receipt of good wages an order was made by the Court that the defendant pay the sum of £1 per week, commencing on the 19th inst. or, in default, six. weeks’ imprisonment; costs 225, two witnesses 20s and 21s professional costs.

Seddon Bros. v. Simpson.—-Claim £2 Is ! Sd. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs of Court. Seddon Bros, v, Laurie and Smith.— Claim £8 2s 2d, As the plaintiff admitted. Lanrie had paid his half; and the other defendant not appearing, a judgment was given against Smith for £4 Is Id, with costs of Court. Seddon Bros. v. Wartraan and Nicholson.—-Claim, £6 16s lid. One of the defendants having stated his mate had paid some money to the plaintiffs since the summons was.issued the case was adjourned for a week to enable him to produce evidence of the fact.