RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Issue 894, 5 February 1868, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before H. M'Culloch, Esq., E.M.) MONDAY, 3bd FEBRUARY. The ooly police case on the sheet was a charge of drunkenness against a man named John Williams, who was arrested in a helpless state, and in the morning it was found that his arm had been broken in some disturbance he had been engaged in, and he had been sent to the hospital. At the suggestion of the Court the charge was withdrawn. Civil Cases. gabthwaite v. pt7ettelkow a2td boss. This was a claim for £16 14s, the value of certain chains, lent by the plaintiff in the removal 6i the s.s. " Waihopai " from the place where she was built to the jetty. Mr Macdonald appeared for the defendant, Boss; and Mr Harrey for the defendant, Puettelkow. The plaintiff appeared in person. From the plaintiff's statement it appeared that the greater part of the chain had been lent to Puettelkow, but that some portion of it had been sent for by Mr Ross, and from this it was attempted to be shown that Mr Boss was liable as a partner with Mr Puettelkow. An agreement was produced between Mr Puettelkow and Mr Boss by which Mr Boss was to have an equal share in the vessel when completed and launched. The plaintiff applied to Mr Boss, who subsequently became the owner of the vessel for the return of the chain, when he found that a large portion of it was missing, and refused to receive what Mr Boss offered him. Plaintiff then sent in an account for the value of the chain, which Mr Boss refused to pay, alleging that he had purchased the chain with the vessel, but agreed to give up what chain he had in his possession. The defence on the part of Mr Boss was that he was not liable to the plaintiff for the value of the chain, the defendant, Puettelkow, having represented to him that the whole of the chain used in connection with the vessel, and her removal, was his own. This was denied by the defendant Puettelkow, who swore

that he told Mr Boss a fourth portion of the chain was the property of the plaintiff. Counsel on the part of each defendant ' having addressed the Court, the Eesident Magistrate decided that Mr Eosswas not : liable, that Mr Puettelkow borrowed * the chain, and nothing had been proved 1 to shew that Mr Eoss had rendered , himself liable but for a small portion of < it. Judgment for plaintiff as against Mr Puettelkow, to be reduced to a farthing on the return of the chain. Mr Harvey suggested to the Court that Mr Boss had the chain in his possession, and inquired how Mr Puettelkow could give it up. The Eesident Magistrate said he must get it from Mr Eoss. BODGEBS V. SMITH. Claim for £5 Os 9d. Judgment by I default, with costs. j