MAGISTERIAL.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2917, 1 August 1882, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

TIMAEU—THIS DAY. [Before J. Beswick, Esq., R.M.,, B. J. Stericker, and £. El worthy, Esqrs.] ikcendiabism. Dennis Heffernan was charged with procuring the setting on fire of certain stacks at the Levels Station,-with intent to defraud the New Zealand Insurance Company. Mr Hamersley appeared on behalf of accused. Mr Pender asked for a remand on tho ground that be was not prepared at once to go on with the case. Mr Hamersley submitted that he was entitled to ask what was in the bands of the police, and further that bail should be allowed in a moderate amount. flis Worship remanded the case until Thursday and allowed bail, accused in £IOO, and two sureties of £IOO each. CXVIt CASES' ' -■ .< Property Tax Commissioner v,; Dennis Hoare, claim £45 Jb lid.^ Mr White appeared for plaintiff and Mr Tosswill for defendant. For tho plaintiff the following evidence was taken. Thomas Howley, Clerk to the Bench, deposed to having been Deputy Commissioner of Property Tax. and to tho genuineness of the signature of defendant to the assessment note produced.' Cross-examined by Mr To'sswill—l did not know that defendant did not own the land.

Denis Hoare, deposed—The land was not his. He. had sold it to one Hayes. Hayes had promised to pay these charges. To Mr Tosswill —I left the ■ whole arrangement to Mr Hall, who said I was not liable. Mr Hall said he would send up the notice of the transfer. After hearing argument, His Worship reserved judgment. In the following: cases judgment was given for plaintiffs, for amount claimed, with costs Powell (as assignee) v; Turkington, claim 8s 9d; ■ Priest v. Harris, claim £1 Is ; Franks v. Lemon, claim £lo'7o.

Evans, Grandi and Dooley v. Mundell, claim £6 2s 3d. Mr, ; Tosswill for plaintiff, Mr White for defendant. Mr Tosswill said this was an octipn : brought to recover the price of three cushions, and the freight of them to Geraldine.

The followingJavidence was taken W. Dooley, one of the plaintiffs, deposed to the making and delivery of three cushions to the order of Mr J. Mnndell. # In cross-examination witness admitted that leather cushions bad been ordered. The cushion (produced) was called intho trade a leather cushion, but it was not a leather cushion strictly, having a leather top and a duck bottom. Ho considered this cushion was a leather cushion, in the usual way of the trade. J ’ To His Worship—lt is most unusual to make a cushion all leather. Had we known a real, leather required we should have made it. J. Evans, another of the plaintiffs, corroborated the evidenceof the previous witness as to trade moaning of the term leather cushion. To Mr White—£2 is a fair charge for cushions of this kind, size, and material. W. Baker, a coaohbuilder, corroborated the plaintiff’s statement as to the technical meaning of the term “ leather cushion.” He considered £2 a fair price for the cushion produced. Archibald Frazer, a coachbuilder, gave similar evidence. For the defence, Mr White stateti that his client, acting for a friend, hud ordered leather cushions had returned them as unfit. He called, J. Mundell, of Geraldine, who deposed to giving the order for the cushions, and to having particularly stated that he wanted goad leather cushions. . He specially arranged for their being all leather without duok.

The, cushions (produced) were not as ordered. A. Reid deposed to having asked Mr Mundell to obtain three leather cushions for him, and to their not being made as ordered. _ , , His Worship said the Bench were of bninion that the cushions were made properly according to the custom of the trade, and gave judgment for the amount claimed, with costa, and witness expenses, amounting in all to £9 4s 3d. Morris v. Eeid, claim £6. . Mr Jameson for plaintiff ; Mr Reid for defendant. ... This was a case in which a cow sent to grazj on defendant’s land had been detained by him. • The defence was that a bill was owing for grazing, and for services rendered in connection with the calving. After hearing the evidence His Worship gave judgment for £6, the value of the cow, £3 4s profit,costs and solicitors’ fee £2 2s, being £ll 6s in all.