RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Issue 1714, 14 March 1873, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before H. M'Ciuloch, Esq., R.M.). Tuesday, 11th March. Aitlcen v. Cross, and Cross v. Aitlcen, were actions arising from an arrangement made between the parties for the surrey of certain land in Stewart's Island in December, 1871. Mr Wade appeared in both for Mr Aitken, and Mr Harvey or Mr Cross. Mr Aitke i sought to recover £9 for professional services in the surrey of the land. For Mr Cross it was contended that the surrey had never been completed, and that Mr Aitken had not his chain with him and could not complete it. Oil behalf of Mr Aitken evidence was led to show that the chain was left behind by Mr Cross's negligence. Mr Cross* counter claim was for money paid on account, passage money to Stewart's Island, and board and lodging. The evidence was Toluminous and conflicting. Both parties were non-suited. Wyld «. Anderson. — This was a claim for £30 damages for an assault. Mr Wade for plaintiff, Mr Mac lonald for defendant. The assault was admitted, but on behalf of defendant it was pleaded in mitigation of damages that there had been great provocation. This appeared to consist in the fact that defendant's son, a lad of about 19, had left the parental roof some time ago, and that the father believed plaintiff knew where the lad was, but would not tell. The assault was describsd as a violent one, and plaintiff had been unwell and unfit for work since. His Worship said that the assault was most unjustifiable. He would reserve his decision as to the amount of damages. Sloan and Son v. Connell.—Clekim for £4 5s Id, goods sold. Detendant did not appear. Judgment for plaintiffs, with costs, 9s. Findlay v. JPicJcford. — A similar claim for £4 168 Ju Igment lor plaintiff, with costs, 9j. Hart v. Shaw.— Olaitn for £1 6s wages. Mr Harvey appeared for the defendant, on whose behalf evidence was led to show that plaintiff had agreed to work for defendant for three months, and had left before the expiry of that time without sufficient cause, and without leaTe. Plaintiff was nonsuited. Smith v. Colin M'Kinnon. — Claim for £13 7s, carpenter's work done in building a house. Mr Harvey appeared for defendant, in whose behalf he pro .uced oon tract for the completion of the house, and led evidence to show that it was not done. Plaintiff said that the" work had l>een I altered since he began, and he wished now to have nothing more to ao with it, >s he could get work elsewhere. He was told by the Court that he must finish the work, and claim for the alterations as extras. Plaintiff was accordingly nonsuited. Wednesday, 12th Maboh. Wyld v. Anderson. — Judgment was given in this case for plaint ff, damages £20, with costs, £5 10a. Thursday, 13th Mabch. James Kennish, a habitual offender, vru charged by the police with being drunk and disorderly in Dee-street on Wednesday evening, and fined 40s, or in default a week's imprisoni ment.