MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LI, Issue 273, 11 November 1908, Page 4

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

A sitting of the Magistrate's Court was lield yesterday morning before Mr. 11. !\ t'itzherbert, >S.M. Two first oU'enders were convicted ot drunkenness. One was discharged and the other, who tailed to appear., was lined ss, in default 21 hours' imprisonment.

Maud Kice, a young girl, pleaded guilty to a charge of having attempted to commit suicide at Waitara on Hun-, day. Mr Wilkes, who appeared for accused, made a plea of leniency. The 'accused took a large dose of clilorodyne, and Dr. Claridge had considerable difficulty ill saving her life. Private troubles had made the girl respondent. She was now very penitent. His Worship severely reprimanded her, pointing out that ali persons bad their troubles and she should learn to bear hers. Ascertaining that she had employment to go to he convicted and ordered her to come up for sentence when 'called upon, hille was also ordered to pay all costs. Albert Xapporly. a youth, who was recently arrested in the Canterbury province, was remanded to appear at Opunake on Friday to answer a charge that, on September 15. 1(107, at Pillama he did commit theft of a chestnut mavo, valued at .CIO, the property of one i Kangitaua, of I'iliama.

CIVIL BUSINESS. Judgment for plaintiff hi default of defendant was given in the case of White and Sons v. .John Malonc, ,£1 9s 8d (costs os).

11l the judgment summons case of the Western Packing and Canning Co. v. Robert Darling, a debt of £23 17s. defendant was ordered to pay the amount willi'n one week, ill default 14 days' imprisonment.

A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES. .John Francis Mulquecan. of New Plymouth, manufacturer, sued William Charles Nixon, electrical engineer, etc., for 13) Bs, of which tis was for goods seized and CIO for damages for seizure aud detention. Defendant eounterclaimed for 1!Iti Is lOd. balance due by plaintiff to defendant for supply and delivery of the goods mentioned and for Jilting them. Mr. R. C. Hughes appearid for plain till" and Mr. Frank Wilson for defendant.

The case for the plaintiir. as outlined by his counsel and supported by his evidence, was that a short time ago hj»» opened a shirt and hosiery factory

in Devon street, New Plymouth. As lie needed power, he purchased an electric motor from defendant fori',ls. The cost of titling it, etc., was to be about C 7. The motor was then installed.

I'laiutiir paid CIO down and an agreement was to have been drawn up under which lie was to pay oil' the remainder in monthly instalments of C2 each.

The factory did not pay. and plaintiff gave up the business, vacating the premises. He sent the motor to Messrs. Ross and Fantham's store hi Molesworth street, and told an employee oi defendant's at their shop that lie had done so on the same day. PlaintilV left the key of his shop at Mr. Nixon's premises, so that tne latter could remove the meter board, which was attached to the Borough Council's electric supply wires. Mr. Nixon returned the key to him afterwards. Later plaintiff found that defendant had removed the motor from Ross and Fantham's store.

Cross-examined by Mr. Wilson, plaintiff said ho had not signed the agree-, ment referred to, which was to have been a simple one for tin l payment of "£2 per month. It was tendered to him only after tile motor had been removed. He did not remove the motor on Monday, October oth. He shifted it because he did not want to pay unnecessary shop rent, and not because a distress warrant was going to be. served on him. lie could not remove the meter board without interfering with their wires.

Mr. Wilson admitted that plaint ill' was entitled to a rolurn of the goods. The question was really as to the amount of damages, and ho would endeavor to slum- that the damages i should In- only nominal.

Hi* Worship said it seemed to liiiii J thai plaintill' was entitled to the value ol the goods or llieir return and whatever damages liu. assessed, and def -u da:it, to judgment on the counterclaim for (In- price of the goods less the Clll paid on account. The only question that remained was therefore one of damages. Ilis Worship allowed CIO as damages. He gave judgment for plaintill' for the C-2!) 8s claimed, and for the defendant, on tile counter-claim, for .CHi Is 10d. The net. judgment for plaintiff therefore, was El!) (Is 2d, with costs 1.2 (is.