RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Issue 1248, 10 May 1870, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

— ' -♦ : ' At this court on. Friday last, 6th inst., W. Ritchie sued J. Macinerny for £3 2s 6d, payment for haulage of five spars from the bush where they were cut to the jetty. From the evidence it appeared that plaintiff had undertaken to convey six spars, to be used in the building of a vessel, from the " stump" to the jetty, at the rate of 12s 6d each. One of the conditions, however, was that good tracks from 'this road ■in- to the -various spars, which, in the case of the sixth and largest " stick" it was clearly shown defendant had failed to do, and therefore plaintiff, had not completed his contract so far as it was concerned. Defendant refused payment on the ground that the spar left was considerably heavier than any of the others, and consequently they should not be paid for at the average rate ; that he had made as good a track to it as to the others, and that plaintiff had partly cleared the tracks — " Blewed" the dead logs off the path after they had been chopped through — in the case of the others, and ought to have done the same in the case of the last, and that he (defendant) had had to pay some £2 10s for the haulage of the last log, instead of 1 2s 6d as agreed with plaintiff. Defendant's own witnesses, however, corroborated the evidence on the other side, to the etf ect that the said track had to be greatly improved before it was fit even for bullocksplaintiff was to do the work with horses. . Judgment for plaintiff, with costs, 16s. Judgment was given in the case of M'Michael v. Nichol and Shearer, heard at the Bluff two days before. Plaintiff was non-suited with costs, the evidence having failed to show carelessness on the part of defendants or their servants. On Monday, before a full bench, viz., Henry M'Culloch, Esq., R.M., D. M.' Arthur, Esq., J.P., and John Blacklock, Esq., J.P., a case to which considerable interest was attached, came on for hearing. The suit arose out of an accident whereby four horses were killed on the Oreti Railway in March last, and the owner, Hugh M'Lean, Esq., Strathlane, now sued His Honor the Superintendent for their value, on the ground that the Government was responsible for the proper fencing of the line. Mr .Wade conducted

the case for the plaintiff, and Mr MatHonald aopeared for the Government. The case mainly hinged on the construction to' b^ . put upon the provisions of a certain agreement formerly existing between the parties. The question of the damage wa3 not disputed, the defence bsin» simply a general denial of responsibility. Both sides of the case were mo3t ably argued, and the hearing oooutjiod the court for fully two hours, when their Worship* retired to consider their judgment. : After an adjournment of an hour and-a-half, the decision was given on the facts of the case in favor of plaintiff, for €85, with costs, £4 4s ; the sum suad for was £100, but plaintiff hvi failed satisfactorily to prove ownership of one of the horses, t.h«» prica of whtca was consequently deducted, Mr Macdonald gave notice of appeal. Another ease in which a good many felt Interested, was that between Mr J. W. Mitchell, as treasurer of the Southland Prospecting Association, and Mr T. J. Thoraoson, a shareholder in the company, who refused to pay up the balance due on his share. Mr Wade appeared on behalf of the Association, and Mr Thompson defended .himself, but after a careful hearing, judgment was given against him for the amount,' with costs. • „. ;