The Nelson Evening Mail. THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 1866. LOCAL NEWS. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT,

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume I, Issue 80, 7 June 1866, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. THURSDAY, JUNE 7, 1866. LOCAL NEWS. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT,

[Before J. Poyutee, Esq., R. M.] Wednesday, June 6. Meach v. Cawthron and BentJey. This was a claim of £7 for wages which had been deducted by the owners of the Eleanor. The plaintiff had been steward of the ship, and had disposed of a cask of beef, for which he accounted. An offer of payment had since been made, but the plaintiff refused to accept it unless he was paid for loss of time. Mr. Pitt, for plaintiff, put the expenses in the light of witness's expenses. Plaintiff admitted having received £7 for a cask of beef and retained the money for Mr. Ritchie four months, and that when he was paid off he received the full amount of his wages, less £7. Plaintiff said Mr. Ritchie empowered him to fell the cask of beef. The cost of travelling to and from Canterbury was £8. For the defence Captain M'Lean was called. He said: I was master of the Eleanor from October, 1865, to March, 1866. I remember Mr. Ritchie sending a cask of beef on board, prior to my going to Bruce Bay. The vessel was purchased by Messrs. Bentley and Cawthron, October 23rd. About the 9th or 10th November I was at thn TJnller, and did not authorise the steward to sell a cask of beef. The stores were under my charge, but I gave no receipt for them. I missed the beef a trip or two after leaving the Buller when at sea and short of meat. The steward told me he had sold the cask and was going to keep the money. I first told Mr. Cawthron he had sold the beef, at the time he was discharged, because he would not give up the money. I paid him his wages in full," less the £7, by Mr. Cawthron's instructions. I saw this cask of beef come on board at liokitika. Mr. Ritchie told me they were ship's stores. It was the only ensk of salt meat on board. I think the ship was alongside the wharf at the time. Mr. James Bentley said : I bought Mr. Ritchie's half-share in the Eleanor in October last. I paid so much for the ship, and £31 15s. for the half of the stores, which were not enumerated. It was a lump sum. There was no inventory of stores given to me. I never told Meach that Frost had the inventory. I received a letter from Pvitchie in which he did not allude to an inventory, or say he had been paid for the cask of beef which I believe belonged to me. Both Mr. Cawthron and myself purchased on the 23rd October. I think. Mr. Cawthron denied that he had offered to send Mr. Ritchie the £7 if he would return a receipt in full of all demands. ITe said: on the 23rd October last I bought Mr. Fisher's share of the Eleanor and stores ior a lump sum. I informed the steward, mate, and captain that I was owner, and that from that date all receipts and disbursements had to bo .accounted for to myself and Mr. Bentley. On the 27th February I learned that Meach had sold a cask of beef from on board. lat first told the steward I should charge him with embezzlement. He said Mr. Ritchie had authorised him to sell the beef. ITe excused himself in this way, and I then told him I would deduct it from his "wages, and write to Mr. Ritchie on the matter. He agreed to this, and asked me for the memorandum now produced, to give to Mr. Ritchie as an explanation. He then got the balance of his moneyjifrom Captain Maclean. I discharged him and thought the matter was ended. Three days after I heard of a summons being issued. Last week I saw Meach again. I si\v\ I had received a letter from Mr. Ritchie, in which he seemed to think the meat belonged to him. I offered to give Meach the money if ho would take it to Mr. Ritchie and give me a receipt in full, which Meach refused to do. He did not say he had paid Mr. Ritchie. Mr. Fisher, to whom the matter was referred, was ready to corroborate the captain "s evidence. Mr. Pitt submitted that the defendants had no claim in respect to the beef, as they had offered to pay Mr. Ritchie for it. The plaintiff was clearly not responsible. Mr. Cawthron contended it was for them to account to Mr. Ritchie, but Meach having sold filestores and kept the money was bound to account for it. The Magistrate: The evidence seems very unsatisfactory. One would have thought an inventory would have been prepared, which was not the case. When the plaintiff was paid, the question does not seem to have been raised ; it was not said the meat belonged to the ship, but it w as agreed to refer to Mr. Ritchie, from whom there is no letter to show his view. Plaintiff says he paid the money to Mr. Ritchie's banking account, "he is therefore entitled to his wages. The defendants have made a considerable reduction in their evidence ; I am therefore obliged to take the medium, which is in favor of the plaintiff. As to allowing him all the expenses he demands, that would be out of the question. Judgment for plaintiff £16 9s. ■ The adjourned case of Parker v. Augarde was again postponed for three we<?ks. De Carle v. W. Taylor.— Claim 4/ 4s. 9d. for goods sold in Langford's estate. Judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed. Leadham v. Ellis.— Claim 38/ ss. 9d. A further hearing of this case took place this morning. It arose out of a partnership dispute. An arbitration had been consented- to, and an award given of 70/ 14s. 10d., Avhich defendant contended was a final settlement. Mr. Pitt, for the plaintiff argued that the cluim had arisen since the award was given. After a tedious examination of the plaintiff, the case was again adjourned for a fortnight to secure the attendance of Mr. Fearon.