RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume IX, Issue 317, 24 September 1874, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

[Before LowxHtea Bboad, Esq., R.M.]

This Day. Artillery Band v. M'Rae. Judgment was given in this case this morning as follows .'—" This case is properly brought as one of simple contract, and not as a guarantee aa seems to be generally supposed. The question really .is " did the defendant promise to pay the plaintiff* certain moneys in consideration of their playing their instruments at the races ? " The plaintiffs' aver penerilly that he did ; there is, however, one remarkable difference in the evidence Of Avery and Scott, and which is material in view, of ihe defence setup. Avery says " M'Rae did not say he bad collected tbe money in the room "" bcott says M M'Rae said they had collected £7 10*. and this, with £5 Augarde had, made £12 10s, and the balance," £2 10s was to be collected on the ground." The defendant and his witness, Mr Otterson, both : ?sfate that defendant only undertook to collect the money, and actually, did bo; further that they told the band they had collected the money all but a few shillings and paid it to Staverc, and that thereupon the pitintiffs agreed to go to the races. It will be seen that Scott's evidence confirms this in some measure. The band then, according to the defendant, knew that nearly all the money hadbeen collected by public subscription and paid to Stavert.and they acquiesced in that arrangement. This seems linei? fiom the tact of iheir applying to Stavcrt or payment in the first instance. There can be no doubt that they were quite contented with Stavert'a responsibility as they state they wanted, and would have been content with, his guarantee. The evidence as to the defendant's promise to pay is bo -contradictory, that I have no option but to nonsuit the plaintiffs. They, in co mmon with many more, are, I believe, the innocent victims of disgraceful fraud. Plaintiffs' nonsuited with £1 Is costs.