RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 5680, 13 June 1879, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Thursday, June 12. (Before T. A. Mausford, Esq., R.M.) DRUNKENNESS. One inebriate, for rolling about Willls-streefc, was fined 55., or in default, 24 hoars’ imprisonment. STEALING FROM THE PERSON. Amy Cochrane was charged with stealing a £1 note from William Mndgeway at 2 a.m. on Thursday morning. Prosecutor depesed that he was in Young's oyster saloon. Prisoner was also there. After having some oysters he went to sleep, and on waking missed a £1 note, also his watch and chain. Ho turned to prisoner and said, “ Give me ray watch and -chain.” Prisoner then returned them, and he gave her into custody. Mary Brown stated that she saw the prisoner take the money out of prosecutor’s pocket. His Worship sent prisoner to gaol for fourteen days. CIVIL CASES. Judgment summons :—Curtis v. Hodgman. Claim £4 12s. Defendant did not appear, and ho was ordered to pay the debt by instalments of 20s. per week, or three weeks' imprisonment. In the following cases judgment was given for the plaintiffs for the amount claimed and costs :—Burrett v. Battersby. Claim £2 ss. Hallenstcin Brothers v. Berry. Claim £9 9s. Bd.—Munro v. Breen. Claim £4 2s. lid.— Hannah v. Mason. Claim £lO ss. 9d. Charles Mclntyre r. C. Basoand.—Claim £2 Bs. 6d., for bread delivered on board the Sampson. Mr. Ollivier appeared for the defendant. Plaintiff stated that the defendant was captain and providore of the s.s. Sampson. The steward ordered the bread. The defence was that the debt was not contracted by defendant, and that the plaintiff had made a mistake in not suing the providore of the vessel. Defendant stated that a man named Picard had a contract for providoring the vessel. Picard had since left Wellington. Plaintiff was uou-auited. Arch. Ferule v. Carl Peters.—Claim £1 55., for work and labor done. Mr. Travers appeared for the plaintiff. Defendant contended that the work was not properly finished. Judgment for plaintiff for £1 and costs. AVi Toko v. C. Osbourne.—Claim £ls, for trespass, Mr. Ollivier for plaintiff and Mr. Fitz Gerald for defendant. His Worship did not think the amount of damage done of a serious nature, and assessed the damage at 405., for which amount judgment was given with costa. Woods, Crosbie, arid Co. v. W. Meredith, junr.—Claim £l2, for. loss of time in going up conntry to purchase’ some sheep. Mr. FitzGerald appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. Izard for tho defendant. Mr. Izard contended that there was no contract proved, and submitted that the plaintiff should be nonsuited. Mr. Fitz Gerald elected to take a non-suit with costs. i Peter B. Monrant v. Philip Vourtier.— Claim, £67 10s. Mr. Bell appeared for tho plaintiff. The plaint set forth was as follows ; —That by a demand of the Court Royal of the Isle of Jersey, dated December 20, 1373, the defendant was, at the suit of plaintiff, adjudged to pay the plaintiff the sum of £SO, and interest at 6 per cent, per annum from the 22nd of June 1871. The defence was that in the year 1875 the defendant, by his attorney, passed his property, both real and personal, in the hands of the Royal Court of the Isle of Jersey, in virtue of the law relating to remise de Hairs enlre Us mains de la Justice, which property was subsequently dealt with according to the laws of the said Island, thereby freeing the defendant from ail liabilities in respect of all claims against him on his estate. The defendant made a very long statement to the Court to the effect that he was not liable to pay.— His Worship asked Mr, Bell what he had to say ia regard to having no jurisdiction.—Mr. Bell cited several oases.—His Worship adjourned the case until he had looked into the cases cited by Mr. Bell.