RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.— Yesterday.

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 172, 27 April 1872, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.— Yesterday.

Before Jackson ICsodell Esq., Warden. WiNDiNG-ur Ord-b. Crystal Palace G.M.C. —Mr Dodd made an application for an order to wind up this company, which was granted, and Mr A. 13. Bain appointed official agent. D. Orme v. C. Bonar. —This was a judgment summons case for £2 8s 9d. The defendant wlm was brought up by warrant, having failed to appear on summons, was examined as to his means and ability to nay. The defendant said lie was in receipt of £2 per week, but bad his parents to keep. The judgment was obtained against him and another person who had cleared out, aud lie thought it was rather hard that the whole burden should fall upon h ; m. —The R.M. said this might be so, but nevertheless defendant was liable, and must pay the amount within 14 days, or go to gaol lor a month. The plaint ill: stated tiiat defendant's means were larger than he had stated, and that lie had lately sold a horse for £25. Conroy and Foss v. J. Mcßae. —This was another summons ior SJ2(is. —Defendant was examin'd to show cause way lie should not pay the amount. — i’lie doloiidaut said lie was a carpenter, but was not now in work, and had other liabilities to meet. lie would not be able to pay more than 2s (id per week. This debt was incurred 18 months ago.—'J lie R.M. made an order for payment of the amount at the rate of 5s per week, or in default 14 days’ imprisonm. lit. Casks Adjourned.— Savage G.M.C. v. T. Combes, £l2 15s Gd, calls; Same v. If. Rowe, £l2 15s (jd ; adjourned until May lOtii. M. Ryan v. V. Wallnntt, £4 Bs, adjourned until next Court day. Undefended Cases.

Judgments for Plaintiffs. —M. Mulligan v. J. Fox, I for money lent ;F. C. Dean v. A. Preece, £1 Its oil, rates ; Same v. J. Clarkson, 11s.Jd, rates; M. J. Perstoii v. If. Baker, 15s rates; Virginia. City G.M.C. v. J. M. Murray, £lls 2s (id calls; Lamb v. Coronet G.M.C., £sl 17s Id ior timber and cartage; it. M. Scott v.Ncvami G.M.C., £BO 0s 44 for services as legal manager; J. Norton v. E. Hogan, £l2 10s Gd ; If. T. Jones v. T. Taylor, £8 ior wages ; J. Osborne v. T. Summerstone,£ 1 18s 11 (i wages. Mann v. Warren. —ln libs case, which stood over for judgment from the previous Court day, the R.M. said lie was of opinion that the point raised by Mr Dodd, that, Casey Warren’s partner should have been joined, was a good one. lie had no doubt the goods were supplied, but lie would ask plaintiff to take a nonsuit, on the point raised. —Mr Macdonald said plaintiff would bo quite satisfied by bis ,’cracity being established, the Court being of opinion that the goods were supplied.

C. Curtis v. E. O'Connor. —Mr Tyler for plaintiff, and Mr Macdonald for defendant. This was an action to recover the sum of CIO for damag'-s. l’iaintiff deposed that he is the landlord of the Pacific Hotel. Thu defendant was in his service as waiter on the 18th ilist., on which day the defendant and another waiter got lighting in the dining room, and witness interfered. Whilst O'Connor and Williams (ihe other waiter) were lighting, the formerstmek a blnw at the latter, which, instead of hitting him, smashed a glass vase, containing wax imitations of fruit, and was worth LB), hut. is not now worth £3. —By Mr Curtis: I paid £lO cash for it. It was sent over irom Melbourne lobe rallied, hut was not raffled, and witness gave a cheques for £lO to Turner, the steward of the Challenger for it. Never heard any of the customers say tlio sight of the thing spoilt their digestion. I don’t thiiiiv I was taken in by the bargain. I purchased it because it pleased me. The fruit could not now he fixed up again without being sent to ,\jellxniriie. I was not hacking either of those parties who were lighting. 1 tried to stop them. The vase was broken at the second round between them. I was brought to the Court on the 2l)lh, for putting O'Connor out of the room, and was lim-d 10s. 1 issued the summons that morning' previous to the case coming on. I intended to summons O'Connor l’or the damage. ’inis action

is not brought as a sort of counter to liie assault case. — By Mr Tyler: Turner,from whom I purchased the vase, gave £ 1U forit on the Quecn-M reel Wharf in my presence. —fames Williams, waiter at the Pacific Hotel, stated that he had a light with O'Connor on the night or the 18t.li ins!. O'Connor, in making a blow at witness's head, instead co. hitting it. the vase of fruit and smashc t it.—By Mr Macdonald : l am not skilled in the noble art, nor ever studied under a master, but it: a man pilches into me I’d hit him. I don't know much about Lie “ science,” but I know how to hob hack to avoid a blow, and did so on this occasion. Mr Curtis came in and said, “Get out of this or I'll kill the pair of you." This was at the end of the first round. O’Connor challenged me to tight. I was about to go to bed at the time. He said, “You think you're a smart chap, hut I'll take the conceit out of yon, ami put you through your facings.” He said I might have given him a hand with his worn, and I replied that I was not going to do His work as well as my own. I offered to pay Mr Curtis my share of the damage if O'Connor would do the sain —- By Mr Tyler: No part of my body touched the vase, and it must have been broken by the blow, or have broken itself.—The R.M. said he did not suppose defendant wilfully broke the vase, hut it was his misconduct which brought on the mishap. As to the value of the article he must take .Mr Curtis’s evidence, who stated lie gave £lO for if, and that Turner had previously purchased it for the same sum, and that it might he now worth £3. He should ther upon give judgment t'o.i plaintiff for £7 and costs. £2 11 (id. O'Connor v Curtis. —This was an action hetwen the same parlies', U’Cminor suing for £(i ss. for warn s as waiter, at 111 per week. The only question in dispute was as to one weeks wages '.''hen defendant was discharged i< r misconduct. The rest was admitted. — ibe R.M. said lie was (if opinion that the master was justified in dismissing the servant. —Judgment was given for £5 5s and costs, £2 4s.

A CHILD SCALDED TO DEATH. A melancholy case of scalding occurred on Wednesday, resulting in the death, yesterday morning, of the unfortunate little sufferer. It seems that about seven o’clock yesterday morning Mrs Storey, wife of James Storey, overseer of the workmen employed by the City Council, was going about her ordinary duties, after having got ready her husband’s breakfast. The deceased, James Storey, a child only seven months old, was crawling about the floor in its night-dress. Suddenly the mother heard a scream, and, rushing across the room, she found that the child had pulled over the coffee-pot which was standing on the hob, and had scalded its breast and stomach from the throat clown to the navel. The assistance of a neighbour was called in, Mr Storey being out at work, and the child was wrapped in flannels and a medical man sent for. Dr. Dawson was soon in attendance, and did all that was possible for the sufferer, but without effect, for the poor little thing died at ten o’clock yesterday morning, from the shock to tiie Nervous system. We believe no inquest will he held upon the body.— Herald.