RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4371, 24 March 1875, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Tuesday, Maiicb 23. (Before J. C. Crawford, Hsq., 8.M.) THE DALLAM TOWER AGAIN. Quartermaster I’owlea, and ether members of the crew of the ship Dallam Tower, being in attendance to receive the opinion of the Bench in reference to their application made on the previous day, His Worship said ho had gone carefully through the Merchant Shipping Act, and had consulted with the Collector of Customs upon the subject, but had failed to discover any clause which would meet the case put before the Court by Quartermaster I’owlcs. The 7th clause of Part 111. gave power to the Court to order a survey ,where representations were made as to the defective equipment of the ship ; but as a necessary preliminary to that step, the men must first be charged-with refusal to go to sea in her. It was at once apparent, therefore, that that would not meet the views of the men ; but under no other circumstancee could he interfere. Several other members of the crew made complaints as various as they were numerous, hut his Worship declined to take notice of them unless brought before him in a form in which he could adjudicate, namely, by way of information lodged in the ordinary manner. ASSAULT. One of the ship’s boys, named Page, then lodged an information again jt the captain for afaault. The case was set down for hearing at

two o’clock, at which hour Page failed to appear, and the case was dismissed-. - CIVIL OASES. : f" ■ Williams v. McGuire.—Claim of £l3 10s. which was not disputed.: Defendant,- however, put ,in a contra claim for a similar amount, composed ef sums for gas and water rates which plaintiff had neglected to pay while in occupancy of a house belonging to the- defendant. These items were admitted to be correct, and plaintiff expressed her willingness to pay as soon as Mr. McGuire gave satisfactory proof of having paid them himself. A further item of £2 10s., for damage to wall paper? was reduced, ■ and judgment givent for amount claimed, leas the reduction noted. Gladmau Smith v: B. Weston. —Claim 'of £l6, being commission of 2- per cent, upon £BOO, the value of a property at Picton, formerly known as the Tasmania Hotel, placed in plaintiffs hands for sale. - Mr. -Gordon ‘Allan appeared for the plaintiff, Mr. Robt. Harffoithe defendant. The facts of the case are very simple. It appeared from th 6 statement of the plaintiff that in January,' 1874,'flefendant called at his office on Lambton-quay, and after some conversation as to the"nature of his business, defendant signed the usual commission agent’s certificate, authorising Mr; Smith to sell the . property at Picton for the sum of £BOO, the terras being that in the’event of a sale being effected, Smith was to receive 4 per cent., and if there was no sale he Was to receive 2 per cent., the property to remain in hi? hands for twelve months. Upon the- strength of these instructions he advertised the place iri his window, mentioned the property to several customers Who declined it ns an investment, and appointed a Mr. Stevens, at Picton, to act as his agenty to whom he would have/ to pay half commission whether he recovered from Colonel Weston or not. Colonel Weston’? version of the matter was that when he went to Smith’s place he expressed hid willingness to take from £SOO to £6OO for the ,hptel,, but that Smith said it was worth £BOO. Accept-; ing this opinion as to the yalud’df the property, he’ authorised 1 him to ask £BOO for it,,iipou which sura he was to receive 4 per ,cent, commission upon effecting’a sale. He was to have 2 per cent, if there was no sale, there being a specific understanding that the 2 per cent, was to defray advertising charges,' The defendant, 1 however, had never.advertised ;the property in the newspapers, therefore he was entitled sto make no charge.. As to his having engaged Mr. Stevens, at Picton, to act as agents he (Colonel Weston) saw, Mr. Stevens on Saturday last, when that gentleman repudiated any 1 connection of the kind? stating‘that lie had' only had one transaction with Mr. Smith- in 1 his life, and that then something took place that was not very creditable to Mr. Smith/ The property was now in the hands of another person, for sale at £400; -.ln answer to these: statements, Mr. Smith said he Could produce letters to prove that -Mr. Stevens had accepted the agency and that he expected a commission; that he had forwarded private bills to Mr. Stevens, to be posted'on the property, notifying : that it was in the market for sale; arid he .fui- j ther distinctly denied,that he had ever under-: taken to advertise the property in the new?-1 papers as a condition precedent to his receiving the 2 per cent. ‘ . Upon the application of Mr. Hart, the ease | was remanded for a fortnight for the prirpose of obtaining the evidence of Mr. Stevens, which will be taken at Picton. ■ Several cases ’’ on the list were' settled out of court.