RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Volume VII, Issue 4, 4 July 1866, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before H. M'Cullo«h, Esq., R.M.) y MONDAY, 2nd JULY. WISHART V. CLARE. This was an action to recover £100 damages, alleged to have been caused to the schooner Black Watch, of which the plaintiff was master, by the defendant's negligent and improper management of his vessel, the Marion Renny, on or aboufc the 25th and 29th days of June. Mr Macdonald appeared for the plaintiff. Mr Reid for the defendant. The defendant pleaded that one of the days, viz.— the 25th June, the defendant was not the master ofthe Marion Renny — that he was not guilty of the negligence and improper management alleged in the plaintiff's declaration, and that the damage done to the Black Watch was occasioned by the plaintiff's own fault and neglige nee. It appeared from the evidence adduced by the plaintiff that he arrived with his vessel in New River Harbor on the 14th of June, and during the firsfc week was lying aground. On the 24th the vessel was taken alongside the jetty . by the direction of the Harbor Master ; the Marion Renny lying outside of her. The defendant represented himself to be the master of the vessel at this time, and plaintiff saw him giving orders on board the vessel. On the 25th considerable damage was done to the Black Watch by the ropes of the Marion Renny passing under the counter of the Black Watch, causing much chafing. Nothing, however, very serious occurred on that day. The vessels lay in the same position ever since. Plaintiff received a copy -.of the Harbor regulations produced. Ti^ Harbor Master's Deputy ordered the Marion Renny to move from the jetty on the night of the 24th. On the 29th fckers waa a gale of wind from the S.W., and the Marioa Renny rubbed against the Black Watch, and caused much chafing ; cutting into the planks considerably. The damage done through this chafing the witness estimated at £100. The vessel had been examined by two shipwrights. At the time of the damage on the 29th it was blowing hard. The Marion Renny had no business lying where she wa?. The defendant had command of the Murion Renny on thf 29th, and did not use any means of avoiding the damage that ensued. Warps should have been put out to windward of the Marion Renny t© heave her away from the Black Watch, which had not beeu done by the defendant. In cross-examination the plaintiff stated that the Black Watch was Jmilt of Kauri pine and other New Zealand woods — that Kauri pine was not remarkably hard or soft. Had had fourteen years' experience in New Zealand timbers, and considered Kauri pine fit for shipbuilding purposes. The Black Watch had tenders next the wharf, and also next the Marion Renny ; bub these slipped away once or twice. Between the 24th and 29th witness was on board his vessel every night. Gave notice of the damage to the Harbor Master's deputy, who went to see that the fenders were propeily placed. On the 26th, witness told defendant that the warps of the Marion Ronny were cutting the counter of the Black Watch, and the defendant then said he was master of the Marion Renny. He said he was going away master of her. Witness could not positively state that the defendant said he was then master of the .Marion Renny. On the 30fch June the Harbor Master did order witness to pnt down another fender. There were no fenders on the port side of the Black Watch. There were iron rings round the piles of the jetty, and the weight of the Marion Renny forced witness's vessel against them, which caused most of the damage. Witness believed that had the Marion Renny not been where she was the Black Watch would not have been damaged. Considered that the Marion Renny was the cause of the damage. William Silvie, a boatman in the service of the Harbor Department, deposed to fche moving of the Black Watch in her berth inside the Marion Renny, and beyond this, his evidence did not appear to affect the case on either side. Mr Macdonald. A3 the witness left the box, remarked thhfc he was evidently an adverse witness. G-eorge Croker, a seaman belonging to the Black Watch, gave evidence corroborating that of the plaintiff. Several witnesses were examined on behalf of the plaintiff, whose testimony tended to show that the damage sustained by the Black Watca in the severe yule of the 29tu was owing to the fenders placed between the vessels, and caused by the severity of the weather,' rather than any want of care on the part of defendant. The defence consisted of a denial of the allegations contained in the plaintiff's declaration, ami the defendant was examined at considerable length by the Counsel on either side ; after which a great number of witnesses gave evidence on behalf of the defendant ; amongst them shipwrights, who estimated the damage at from £2 to £10. At the close of the defendants case, the Counsel on either side signified that they did not intend to address the Court, and, The Resident Magistrate gave judgment for the defendant; as he considered that the plaintiff had not sustained the damage from any negligence of the defendant, but rather from a casualty which, from the heavy weather experienced during the previous week, seemed unavoidable.