RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, BLENHEIM.

Marlborough Daily Times, Volume I, Issue 85, 13 January 1880, Page 4

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT, BLENHEIM.

Monday, January 12th. (Before S. Johnson, and J. M. Hutcheson, Esqs., J.P.’s. DRUNKENNESS. One case of drunkenness was dealt with; the accused, who had been locked up since Saturday being discharged. BLICIC V. HITS ON. This was a claim for Ll 5 6s 6d on a bill of ■exchange. Mr Sinclair appeared for the plaintiff. The defendant had confessed judgment in Wellington) for the amount and costs of Court. Mr Sinclair applied for a professional fee of a guinea, and the expenses of a witness added. ;oThe application was granted. ROBINSON BROS. AND ADAMS V. T. GIBBS. This was an action to recover the sum of L2Q on an unpaid order given by defendant upon the Building Committee of the Literary Institute. Tne order was as follows: “Blenheim, Nov. 5, 1879. To the Treasurer of the Building of the Blenheim Literary Institute—Please pay to Messrs Robinson Brothers and F. Adams the sum of twenty pounds, and deduct the same from amount coming to me under my contract for the new building, the amount to he paid out of the second draw. F. Gibbs." Mr Sinclair, who appeared for defendant, said his client did not dispute the debt, but •wanted time. Mr Gibbs had a contract for erecting the new building at the Literary Institute, and received progress payments as the work went. Mr Jas. Robinson said Gibbs owed the firm LlO and Mr Adams LlO, and he gave them an order for the money on the building Committee, which was presented to Mr Waddy, the Treasurer, it having been discovered that Mr Gibbs had transferred his contract to Mr O’Sullivan. If he (Mr Robinson) got a guarantee from Mr O'Sullivan, he was quite willing to wait a month or two months for the money. The Court gave judgment for the amount claimed and oosts. SCOTT V. BYFORD. This was a claim for LB, tho amount of a baker’s bill. The defendant did not dispute the debt, but said he wanted time. Ho was willing to pay 10s a month. Mr Scott said he was not willing to take it. Mr Byford had promised to pay LI per month some time ago. The Bench asked defendant if would pay LI a month. Defendant said he could not pay more than 10s. Mr Scott asked for immediate execution. The Court declined to give immediate execution, but gave judgment for the amount claimed and 8s costs, telling defendant that if he did not make some arrangement with Mr Scott the law must take its course.