RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5452, 17 September 1878, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Monday, September 16. (Before T. A. Mansford, Esq., R.M.) DRUNKENNESS. - Four inebriates, for being drunk in the public streets, were dealt with in the usual way. VAGRANCY. EUcn Robinson, a respectable-looking woman, was brought up under the Vagrant p Act. . His Worship remanded the prisoner for a week. CIVIL CASES. Hyams v. Short. —His Worship gave judgment in this case as follows : —This may be looked upon as a .friendly suit against the bailiff of the Court, to determine whether the proceeds of a sale' of a horse and express should be handed over to Wood?, Croabie, and Co. or to Hyams, both having obtained judgment and issued distress warrants against one Smart, the owner of a horse and express. The distress wairant of Woods, Orosbie, and Co. * was issued on the 21th August; that of Hyams and Co. on the 26th August. The statements of*tho various parties interested are conflicting, which renders it extremely difficult to arrive at a satisfactory conclusion, if the bailiff Short’s version be true, and I see no reason whatever to doubt it, he was instructed by Woods, Crosbie, and Co. to levy upon Smart’s effects in Manners-street, they probably con* sidering that all the other effects of Smart in his other placo of business on Lambton-quay were secured to them by a bill of sale which they held; Woods states that ho seized the horse and express under tho bill of sale, and that when Bowden, the under bailiff, took it away, he told Woods that ho had seized it under Woods, Crosbie, and Co.’s warrant. This Bowden denies, asserting that he was unaware of the existence of Woods, Crosbie, and Co.’s warrant, and that being entrusted with Hyams* warrant,- and knowing that the horse and express belonged to Smart, he seized them; and this appears probable from tho fact of the property having been at once advertised and sold at the suit of Hyams, After tho most careful consideration I have been able to give to the whole of the circumstances, I am of opinion that the horse and express were rightly seized at the suit of Hyams, and that tho proceeds must, in the first instance, bo applied in satisfaction of his judgment, and that tho balance, if any, must bo applied to- *. wards satisfying tho judgment of Woodf, Crosbie, and Co. T. K. Macdonald and Co. v. Macallister; claim, £36,65., the amount of an lOU for tho purchase of a house. Defendant stated that ho bad been misled as to the purchase of tho property. He thought it was a four-roomed house, instead ofwhich it was only a tworoomed house with a lean-to. His Worship reserved judgment.

Judgment summonses.—-D. Bell v. G. Lyall; claim, £5 14s. 3d. Defendant was ordered to pay the amount by instalments of 30s. a wet-k, or in default four weeks* imprisonment.—E. Gibbs v. G. Smith; claim,'£4 10-*. Defendant was ordered to pay the amount within fourteen days, or in default to bo imprisoned fop fourteen days.—Quinn and Austin v. McDonald ; claim, £8 12a. Defendant was ordered to pay the amount on 1 Ith October, or iu default six weeks' imprisonment. In the following cases judgments were given for the plaintiffs :—Mace and Ardell v. Bruce; claim, £l6 17s.—J. W. Neman v. R. Neidargease; claim, £2 17a. 41.—D. E. Toohill v. D. McCarthy ; claim, £6 ss. 7d,