RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Volume I, Issue 27, 2 August 1864, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

— Monday, Ist August, 1864. (Before M. Price, Esq., R. M.) Two men, named Charles Lovell, and Henry Pearee/ for being drunk in Tay-street, on the 30th nit.,. were fined ss. each. Janies M'lntosh, and William Smith, for a similar offence, in Esk-street, on 31st ult., were fined 55.. each. John Davidson was informed against for having in his possession, at Ofceramika, 1500 sheep infected with scab... He pleaded guilty, and was fined Is. per head. , Civil Cases. Beoad t. GritiEYE — Claim for £26 19s. for, goods supplied. Verdict for amount, by default. Scott and Edgar t. P. Hogan. Claim for goods supplied. Verdict for amount, by default. Harms t. Hill. — Claim for brick moulding. Defendant confessed judgment. Verdict accordingly. ■Mitchell t. Popenhagen. — Claim for £28 15s. for goods sold and delivered. No appearance of defendant. Verdict for amount, by default, for plaintiff. Spence Bkothees v. Moban. — In this case Mr. Button appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr. S. M. South for the defendant. It came out that plaintiffs had supplied goods to defendant to the amount of £167, less £20, paid, reducing the claim to £147 os. 7d. The plaintiffs, finding the defendant unable to pay, agreed to take back the goods which had been sent to his order to one Mulligan, at Queenstown, in liquidation of the :debt. Accordingly goods to the amount of £92 6s. 7d., were credited, including an order of £26 on Mr. Mulligan. This sum ■ deducted from • the full claim .of £147 os. 7d., leaves a balance of £54 14s. now sued for. The defendant's statement was that all the goods mentioned in the list as having been returned, were put by him into Mr. Mulligan's hands, as agent for plaintiffs, and that only a part of the goods had been acknowledged by them. The defendant took- credit for £126 86. : 9d., for goods returned, which Mr. Mulligan accepted on bahalf of plaintiffs. The list was made out by Mr. Mulligan, and he put the -prices on himself. 'The 'plaintiffs applied for a nonsuit. Granted accordingly, (Mr. South protesting against it) with costs, £10 125.,The Court then rose.