RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT,

Southland Times, Volume 2, Issue 98, 7 October 1863, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT,

(Bjfore M. Trice, Esq., R.M.) Monday, sth October. j civil cases. kankin v. cole axjl> co. Adjourned. CAVANAGH V. UVESEY. Claim for value of a mare ; case brought up upon adjournment for the examination of one witness. Mr Harvey for the plaintiff; Mr Macdonald for the defendant. J. G. Neville, examined by Mr Kaivey, said that he was an ostler at the Prince of Wales stables. lie knew ihe mare, the subject of the action ; sha had been in the Prince of Wales stables. He had saddled her for various parties in town. She had once come back, after be ng ridden, ill, and likely to slip her foal ; she was therefore sold by auction, an 1 bought in by Mr Livesey for £29. ThciM were no bidders except Messrs Rilertson, Von Hammer, and Livesey. After that she was sold to Mr Pearson ; since then she has been working in a ginger -beer cart. Before that Mr Livesey had her out in harness. She was a beauty. She was then worth £35 or £40. Witness had seen her foal; it was a very nice beast, with good points, worth £14 or .£l6. Cross-examined by Mr Macdonald : I knew the mnru, because she was so long in the j stable with me. She was a brown mare ; she is not a bay mare— brown is not bay. She is branded, but I don't know the brand. I . entered Mr Von Hammer's service the same j week as the news of the Dunstan rush came ' down. The mare was often let out for hire. Mr Bigsby.of the Bank of New Zealand, used to ride her out very often. She was in foal at the time she was hired out. All horses i not stabled by any particular party, I had authority to hire out. I have saddled the mare sometimes on Livesey's account, and sometimes on Hammer's. I only obeyed Mr Livesey as regarded that one mare. I was told by Von Hammer that she belonged to some one up country. Mr Harvey here moved for an adjournment. Mr Macdonald requested, and it was granted, that the adjournment bs till the 3rd November, as Mr Fielder, an important witness, was absent in Australia. IiATZEXSTKIN V. CAMPBKLL. In this case, dismissed by reason of )io anpe.ira.nce, Mr South, who represented the plaintiff, and who was unavoidably absent at the time the case was called, asked that he might be heard. He thought the Counsel for the" defendant had designedly pressed the case. Mr Woston objected to any imputations of the kind ; he had simply done his duty. Mr Sou-th said there was a, certain courtesy due from one professional man to another in the matter of compulsory absence; besides, this was a peculiar case. His Worship here adverted to the rule that lie had, after consultation with the Bar. established — that for the despatch of the business ot the Court, if counsel were not in attendance when a case was called, the same would be dismissed. Mr South said he would know precisely what to do cinotlipr time. Mr Weston replied. Mr Harvey, too, had , something to say ; Mr South answered, and there was a " wordy warfare," which was not without difficulty stopped by his Worship, who said, "Now Mr South and Mr Weston, if you won't attend to the Court when it speaks to yju, I will commit one or both of you to gaol over yonder, for 48 hours. I tell you not to go on talking, and yet you do. It is painful to my feelings to have to take the Bar to task, but really if you do not observe the ordinary rules, I shall be compelled to make an example of you." TOUT V. P.iINZ. Mr Harvey for the prosecution, and Mr Macdonald for tho defence. By Mr Harvey : Plaintiff said— l became possessed of the dog, the subject of the action, when working for Dr. Hodkinson ; a number of people were ill using the dog ; I rescued the dog and he followed me, and has never left me since ; one Whiting subse- | quently askel me to sell him that dog ; as I I refused, he asked me to let him have the dog

for a month for L 5; I lent this '^ person who was driving "sheep for, v this person did not return the do?, k. it to the defendant ; I saw Mr Pri^ quently at Basstian's, and;he told mid was dead, but>-it was' not; I^woula J have the dog than L 2 5; I compute J at L2O. ' - — &. 1 By MrMacdonald : Mr Whiting offJ L2O for the dog ; IleVMr Whiting M dog on the 26th. December, 1861; f fil Mr Whiting after I had given himi^ six months afterwards ; lie had hot tbj clog ; I expected him to return me ft subsequently I saw the dog in Prim session, but he would uot give it B offered me L 5 for itj Mr'Prinzsaidhe not give up the dog to me or to any one do not know whether Mr 'Prinz has gj dog now or not; it has. taken: me three always, to go to Whitingls to see aim dog; I funk a man is;worth at anyta a day ; I made seven journeys to, jyj, By the Court : Prinz kept f<»6ib!> session oFthe dog. '."." ':■"■ By Mr Harvey: Cbarles. Whiting. 8 know the parties in this action, and( pu ted dog. The dog"waß a 5 good dog, Prinz wanted to buy that dog fronvije ago last March. I said I could,iiot sel as he belonged to Mr Port. I tolj would let him have the dog, and settle with Mr Port. He promised, make it «nli right with Mr Port. I ha, Mr Prinz several times since. On oss sion I ordered dinner-i-His Worship: Never mind about dinner. Piinz'toldmethe dog did. not belong ti and refused, having once get possess give him up. He said he had offered the dog, and that Port would not tj The dog has never been returned ton promised to return the dog, when it me, as soon as I had used him enougl By the Court : I offered to purely dog from Port for L2O. Mr Macdonald applied for a non-s as much as Mr Port's remedy was j Mr Whiting and not Mr Prinz. Mr Harvey maintained there wasi plete case, and the non-suit was refust After the evidence for the defend; been heard, the Bench found for the pi £20 and costs. FISHER V, SMITH. Breach of agreement. Judgme defendant. LANGLY AND COXOX "» BIILLBAXK Judgment for plaintiff. Executk delayed eight days. CAMPKELL AN© OTHERS V. HAMiLT; Judgment for £2 odd. HIGGINS V. FOGGETtTIT Judgment by default. Tuesday, 6th Octobeb. The Court was occupied most of i with the case Fisher v. M'Kay, which particular interest for the public. Jn! was given for the plaintiff.