RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2039, 29 April 1890, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Temuka—Monday, April 21, 1890. C. A. Wray, Esq,, R.M.] CITIL OASES. W. C. Roulaton v. John Hamilton— Claim £2 Is 3d- Judgment for amount claimed, less 7s set off allowed. Aspinall and Salmond v. D. Anglaind —Claim £3 13s.

The claim was proved by Mr Salmond, who stated that there was no contention as to the . work not having been done. The only defence was that a bargain was made with Mr Aspinall that there should be no charge unless the work was successfully completed. Mr Aspinall was away and he was prepared to consent to an adjournment to have his evidence taken if necessary. It was decided to go on with the case as far as possible, Daniel Angland said that he had

arranged to purchase a piece of land from a man named McAteer, and agreed with Mr Aspinall tor the transfer of same for £B. When certain steps had been taken caveat was lodged, and he then thinking the case was going to be complicated told Mr Aspinall that he would not be responsible for any further expenses in the matter. He did not dispute that the work had been done. He would swear that he told Mr Aspinall from the first that he would not pay anything for the deeds unless the transaction was completed. By Mr Salmond : On receipt of the bill of costs he told Mr Aspinall that he would pay the first charges incurred, and reminded him of the bargain made. Mr Aspinall had said tfcSSfhe could not be expected to work for nothing, and had threatened to sue. Did not recollect saying that he (witness) believed Mr Salmond had a spitefagainst him. T. McAteer gave evidence as to an agreement to sell -certain land to defendant. Mr Aspinall was to prepare the deeds tor £B, At an interview between all the parties concerned after caveat had been lodged defendant said that he would not be responsible for any further expense. Could not say if the work had been gone on with. His Worship said that it appeared unlikely that Mr Aspinall would go to the expense of incurring agents charges, etc., for nothing, and he thought defendant was mixing up the conversation of two interyiewg. The Court would have the case adjourned -for a fortnight to enable Mr Aspinall .to give evidence: Defendant would " not require to fetch his witness again. C. Story v. W- Worth—-Claim 7s 6d for horse hire. Judgment by default with costs. • .The Coiirt then rose.