The Nelson Evening Mail. TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1867. VOLUNTEER FIRE BRIGADE. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume II, Issue 194, 20 August 1867, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1867. VOLUNTEER FIRE BRIGADE.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

The tenth monthly meeting of the Fire Brigade was held" at the Trafalgar Hotel, yesterday evening, Captain J. T. Kaight in the chair. The minutes of the previous meeting and the Treasurer's account haviug been read, Captain Knight gave a report of the proceedings of the Brigade during the past mouth, and stated with reference to the small engine, the property of Messrs N. Edwards & Co., that he had called, in company with Mr N. Edwards, upon Mr Beunett, who announced his intention, as soon as the lease of the premises now held by Mr Betts should have expired, which would be the case in a few months' time, to take the small engine under his own control, aud keep it on the premises of the firm. When wanted, in case of fire, he would employ a number of men to work it, and would pay for the labor out of the insurances. Mr Edwards then suggested the probability, in the event of this'eugine being employed exclusively to protect the policies of the Insurance Company which Mr Bennett represented, and of a iire breaking out on premises in which that Company had no interest, that the public would "rush" the engine, aud take it out of Mr Bennett's hands. To this Mr Bennett replied that the experiment would have to be tried, and also intimated that he should in future withdraw any support to the Brigade. The small engine therefore remains entirely at the disposal of the firm. Captain Xnigbfc then alluded to a rumor that prevailed to the effect that the Insurance Companies had been corresponding with the Government respecting the pulling down of Mr Taylor's house, and had asked the Government to bear part of the expense which must be incurred in replacing it. In reference to this report he would state that the Provincial Secretary had declined to take any action whatever in the matter, as the Government had not given authority to remove the house. The report too that the insurance agents had intimated their intention of withdrawing their former proposal with respect to the payment of part of the expenses incurred by the late fire had originated in a misapprehension on the part of the Provincial Secretary, in reference to the contents of a letter from Mr H. E. Curtis to him. Captain Knight had also ascertained from Mr Herbert Curtis that the agents generally of the Insurance Companies were ready to pay the amount originally proposed, and that that gentleman did not believe that any obstacle would be placed in the way of the future operations of the Brigade (cheers). It was then proposed and carried that a vote of thanks be given to Mrs Betts for her though tfulness in providing refreshments for the Brigade on the morning of the fire. Lieutenant Murfin. reported that the committee appointed, for the purpose at the last meeting had decided that the Brigade should hold' an anniversary dinner, which should be paid for out of the funds of the Brigade, and resolutions to this effect were accordingly proposed and carried. It was likewise carried that the same committee appointed at the last meeting, Consisting of Contain Knight, Lieutenant Murfin, .Messrjf G. Punter Brown, Gook""aey, and Flootf, be requested to carry out all the arrangements necessary for the anniversary dinner. Resolutions relative to the invitation of honorary members, of members of the Government, the Insurance Agents, ati 4 the Chairman of the Board of Works, on paying for their own tickets, were also carried. A vote of thanks to Mr Albert Pitt, M.P.C., for his public and, private services on behalf of the Brigade was carried. It was decided that the anniversry dinner should take place after the election

of officers for the coming year; that Messrs Greenfield and Sharp be requested be requested to act as Auditors for the past half-year, and that the engine-keeper be empowered to collect all unpaid subscriptions promised to the Brigade, as well as subscriptions and fives due from the members, and to report thereon at the next meeting. Messrs Sowman and Nehse were elected members of the Brigade, and the following were proposed, for election at the next meeting: — Messrs Jas. Drew, Jas. Bradcock, W. Farcy, F. Simpson, H. Moore, VV". Leonard, and Lightfoot. This concluded the proceedings, which were conducted with much uuauimity of feeling throughout, and the meeting then separated.

Monday, August 19. [Before J. Poynter, Esq., R.M.] The following debt cases, extended jurisdiction, were heard : — Fisher v. Cassius and Comisky. — This was an action to recover 83/ 14s. 10d., alleged to be due by the defendants, who are merchants at Hokitika, to the plaintiff. Mr Pitt appeared for the plaintiff, Mr Kingdon for the defendant. The defendants admitted the debt, but pleaded a setoff of "58/ 17s. lOd. Judgment for amount claimed with costs. Hornby v. Disher. This was an action to recover 27/, the price of two horses sold to the defendant at auction on account of Mr Bray, which were bought, subject to trial, as being good in single and double harness. Two days afterwards the defendant tried them and found oue would not go at all, and gave notice to the plaintiff; who afterwards offered to take both horses back, which defendant refused to do, as both had been bought separately. Defendant paid 14. into court. Judgment for the plaintiff in 14/, plaintiff to pay costs. Mr Keon appeared for the plaintiff j Mr Pitt for the defendant. Bond v. Hunter. An action to recover 47/ 15s 7d for plumber's work done for the defendant, who had paid 32/ 9s into court. Mr Keon for plaintiff, Mr Pitt for defendant. The point at issue was whether the work asserted to have been done by the plaintiff was satisfactorily done. Judgment was given for the plaiutifF for the amount paid into court with costs. W. li. Waters v. E. Gough. Action to recover 28/ due from the defendant for the rent of the Oxford Billiard Rooms. Judgment for plaintiff in amount claimed with costs. Mr H. Adams appeared for the plaintiff. C. Elliott, jun. v. James Jary. An action to yecover 38/ 16s 6d, the difference of Is per bushel on 776| bushels of wheat sold to the defendant. Mr H. Adams appeared for the plaintiff, Mr. Pitt for the defendant. Judgment for amount claimed with costs. G. Harris v. T. R. Berry, Action to recover 221105, rent of tenements on the Haven-road, due to the plaintiff. Mr Kingdon for the plaintiff. Judgment in amount claimed with costs. C. Harley & Sons v. Klopp and Kortagast. To recover 76/ 17s 3d, for hops supplied to the defendants who are brewers at Hokitika, and who did not appear. Judgment for plaintiffs, for amount claimed with costs. Tuesday, August 20. The following cases were heard this morning. Hooper, Dodson, & Aitken v. Hartman n & Co. This was an action to recover 41/ 7s 6d, for ale supplied to the defendants, now of Wellington, but formerly of Haveiock. It appeared that the order had been verbally given by Mr Leo, who was treated as a partner in the defendants' firm. The defendants however repudiated the order, as having been given without their sanction. The case was partially heard on the Bth May, having been adjourned from the loth April, and was resumed to-day, for the production by Mr Murdoch of Hartnmnn & Co.'s ledger and daybook, in which a credit appeared of 36/ 7s 6d to the plaintiffs for 10 casks of beer, with a debit entry the same day for freight 2/ 10s. Judgment was given. for, the plaintiffs for 38/ 7s'»d. Mr H. Adams appeared for the plaintiffs, Mr Pitt for the defendants. Frederick and Mary Beckmann v. William and John Brown. This was an action to lecover 88/, for damages, medical attendance, etc., sustained by the plaintiffs through injuries inflicted by a wild bullock, the property of defendants'

father, whilst they were mustering cattle in the Maitai Valley, on the Bth November last. Dr Cotterell proved the injuries sustained by Mrs Beckmann, and stated his opinion that she would never recover the proper use of her arm; The defendants had promised tc recompense the plaintiffs, but had not done so. Mr Pitt appeared; for the plaintiffs, and Mr H. Adams for the defendants, who were adjudged to pay 52/ and costs.