RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2499, 9 January 1877, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

THIS DAY. (Before W. Fraser, Esq., E.M.) CIVIL SIDE.

JUDGMENTS FOB PLAINTIFFS. In the following cases judgment was given for the plaintiffs, with costs:— Hewitt and Co. v. Hopkinson.—Claim, £9 16s 9d, goods, and costs 235. Weston v. Newby.—Claim, £117s 6d, work done, and costs 19s. Mackie v. Same.—Claim, £3 6s, work done, and costs 19s, McVey v. Same.—Claim, £25, promissory note, and costs £3 17s. Binney v. Tookey.— Claim, £35, promissory note, and costs, £4 18s. ■• ■ . '

Judgment Summons.

DABBAH V. HAINLEY. Claim £9 14s. Defendant did not appear. Robert Darrah, sworn, deposed—l am the plaintiff in this case. I saw the defendant and he said he was willing that an order for 5s per week be made by the Court. Ordered to pay 6s per week, commencing Jan. 15th, and failing any payment, one month's imprisonment at Mount Eden. Depended Cases. tXNTHANK V. DBIVEB. . Claim, £12, rent for Hape Creek tramway. Mr Mac'donald appeared for the plaintiff,, and Mr Brassey for the defendant.

Alexander Unthank, sworn, deposed— I am the plaintiff in this action. That document shows I am the lessee of the tramway. From October 9th, to December 9th, I let the tramway to defendant at £6 per month. »The tramway was open to him, and if he did not use it it was no business of mine. Defendant was not taking down stuff during the two months. I lock a truck on the line during the night because children play on the line. I cannot swear that the truck has never been on the line during the day-time. Mr Adams puts the trucks on. He looks after the line for me. The truck is the only obstruction on the line.

William Adams, sworn, deposed—l have charge of the Hape Creek tramway for Mr Unthank. Mr Unthank ordered me to lock a truck on the line to prevent accidents, but one of my boys was always at hand to unlock it if the tramway was wanted. Driver never made any complaints abpuj; the obstruction on the line. I can't say if there were more than one truck on the line. > The truck has never been locked on the line in the daytime to ray knowledge. The line is in good repair. No one was ever prevented from getting down stuff. Judgment for plaintiff £12, and costs, £3. • J. THOMPSON V. BUTCHEB. Claim, £1110, damages. Mr Macdonald appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Brassey for the defendant. John Thompson, sworn, deposed—l was a timber merchant. Defendant got some timber from me, and paid money on account, leaving a balance 6t' £4. He was to pay the balance as soon as his bbat made it. I had a quantity of timber stacked on the beach on skids. Defendant fastened his boat to the skids whilst repairing. A gale arose and carried his boat away, and the skids being taken away all the timber was lost. The value was £7 10s. The skids were at high water mark, but not above spring tide. I recovered only a little of the timber.

Mr Brassey objected to the action for damages, and the action for breach of contract coming in the same plaint. He quoted authorities on the subject. Mr Macdonald contended that the plaint was correct, and quoted instances of judgments being given in cases of the kind. a

His Worship thought the plaintiff had better sue for them separately. Mr Macdonald thought they should wait till two o'clock and see what could be done.

At this stage the Court adjourned till two p.m. .