RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 5818, 21 November 1879, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Thursday, November 20. (Before T. A. Mansford, Esq., 8.M.) CHARGE OF STEALING MONEY, H. T 7. Gundy, charged with stealing £2O in notes from Oliver Murphy on the previous day, was remanded until Monday next, on the application of the police. Mr. Gordon Allan appeared for the prisoner, who pleaded not guilty. JUDGMENT'S. Johnston v. Smith.—ln delivering judgment in this case, his Worship Said th’.i practice of exposing goods for sale outside windows or doorways ought to be discouraged, as it placed temptation in the way, not only of the ordinary thief, but of the poor, needy, and distressed. Without expressing any opinion on the validity of the by-law under which the present information was laid, believing that such matters should be left to the superior Courts, he had no hesitation in arriving at the conclusion that a breach of the law had been committed. Defendant was fined 20s. and costs. ' . Linoard v. Gillon. —This was an action to recover £lO, alleged to be wrongfully paid in March, 1877, as authors’ fees. His Worship said he was of opinion that had the defendant sued for the fees he would have been unsuccessful. No defence of the legality of the payments had been set up ; the only contentian was that a certain - arrangement bad been made by which a weekly payment of £2 was leviable by the agent of the Dramatic Authors Society in this colony. It was clear that there was no agreement between Mr. George Coppia

and Mr. Lingard, who did not acknowledge that he was the agent of the society. Ihe only question requiring decision was, whether the plaintiff was entitled to recover the money after it was paid. Looking at the circumstances of the case, h<* should decide that he was. The payment was, in his opinion, not made on a matter of law or fact, but was made under circumstances of pressure when the plaintiff had no opportunity of resisting the defendant’s demand. This being so, he should give judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed and costs. McCarthy v. Pearman. —His Worship gave judgment for the plaintiff for the amount claimed—£l3 15s. 6d„ for rent—with costs. CAUSE LIST. Moore v. Hicks, £2 10s. OJd. ; ordered to pay the amount within four weeks ; in default, fourteen days’ imprisonment, Cameron’s estate v. Collins, £3 2«. 6d. ; ordered to pay 10s. per month ; in default, fourteen days imprisonment. Same v. Spiers, £lB 165.; ordered to pay the amount, and costs, by instalments of £4 per month ; in default, three months imprisonment. Firth and another v. Bell, £l6 2s. lOd.; ordered to pay the amfrant, and costs, bv instalments of £2 per month ; in default,"three months’ imprisonment. Baker v. Brown, £22 2s. ; ordered to pay instalments of £2 per month ; in default, three months imprisonment. Mclntyre v, Stevens, £3 19s. 3d. ; ordered to pay 2s. 6d. per week ; in default, fourteen days’ imprisonment. Young v. Austin, £2 15a. 2d. ; ordered to pay half the amount within days, and the balance within a month ; in default, fourteen days’ imprisonment. Cameron’s estate v. Witt, £7 Us.; v. Mitchell, £Z2 ; v. Stevenson, £9 155.; judgment for the amounts and costs. Smith v. Colman, £1 12s. 6d,; nonsuited. Mace and another v. Hindge, £3l 2a. 2d.; judgment reserved. Mills v. Martin, £4 15a.; same v. Jackson, £4 75.; judgment reserved. Barber v. Bellairs, £3 16s, 7d.; same v. W. Kimbel), £l3 sa. Bd.; judgment for amounts and costs, Baker v. McGovern, £2 35.; judgment for amount and costs. Mclntyre v. Thacker; judgment for amount and costs. Monteith v. Mandelstain, £2 55.; judgment for amount, and £3 19s. costs ; Barber v. McClelland, £7 75.; judgment for amount. Isaac v. Smith, £4 Is.; judgment for amount and costs. Marks’s estate r. Armstrong, £1 Is. Bd.; judgment for amount and costs. Same v, Ballance, £1 16s. Id.; judgment for amount and costs. Tayton and another t. Richardson; judgment for amount and costs. Pascoe and another v. Watts, £7 10s.; judgment for amount and costs. Berry v. Ryan, £1 2s. 6d.; judgment for amount and costs. Beck v. McDonald, £2 75.; judgment for amount and costs. McCarthy v. Pearman, £l3 155.; judgment for amount, and £1 19s. costs.

A large number of cases were withdrawn, and several were adjourned.