RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thames Star, Volume IX, Issue 3074, 21 December 1878, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

THIS DAY.

(Before H. C. Lawlor and C. H. Otway, Esqs, J's.P.)

CIVIL SIDE.

The following is the conclusion of our report of the proceedings at the E.M. Court'yesterday:—

Defended Cases, coates v. quint.

Claim £15 10s, trover for wrongful detention of sewing machine. Mr Miller for plaintiff, and Mr Brassey for defendant.

It appears that plaintiff who was to married to one Oldrey—who it was alleged had'another wife living—claimed to recorer certain property of her own which had been left by Oldrey with Quint. Quint refused to give them up, alleging they were OldreyY property, and Eldrey was in his debt. ;

Mr Brassey said his principal defence was that plaintiff was a married woman, and could not recover.

Mr Miller submitted that if Mr Brassey wished to plead that, that he should have given 24 hours' notice.

The Bench waived Mr Miller's objec tion. „.';...-:. •■ ...- . ......... ..■,..■ ,

Mr Miller, in addressing the Court, said he could prove that Mrs Coates was not legally married to Oldrey, as he had a wife living. ;■■,.-; '■."■"]

Jane Coates, sworn, deposed—My hiisband's name was William Coates, who is dead. Prior to his decease he purchased me a sewing machine, which I hare had for 4| years. I have not got it now. Mr Quint has it. Previous to Mr Quint taking it two months ago, it had been in my possession. I never parted with it. When Oldrey left me he gave Quint liberty to sell all the things except what I wanted to keep. I wanted to keep the sewing machine. I heard the agreement made, and gave my assent to it. I took the machine to Mr Quint's house, and lived there to take the servant's place until about two months" ago. When I left I asked Mr Quint to let me take my things away, but he said I didn't require them. Previous to this Mrs Quint told me that Mr Quint said he would not let anything go out of the house till' Oldrey paid him. Oldrey did owe Quint some money. I got no pay while I was at Quint's. The machine, with appurtenances, is worth £10 10s: it is as good as new. I know Mr Oldrey. I did go through a ceremony of marriage with him, but at that time I knew of nothing that prevented me. At the time of my marriage Oldrey told me his wife was dead. I was married in February, '75, and a week after I received a letter from Quint, which was something like this : " 1 hope you will not use my wife's name or mine, as you are liviug with a married man named Oldrey, who has a wife and children living." From that I don't believe my marriage with Oldrey was legal. I had heard a good deal of talk about Oldrey's wife being alive, and once I said to him, " I heard your wife was on her way out." He said, "My God, Jennie, who told you ? " When I found he was taking it to heart I told him it was a bit of fun on my part. By Mr Brassey—l have received letters from Oldrey since he went away, and Mr Sims wrote the replies. It is quite likeiy I shall marry Mr Sims shortly. I once left Mr Oldrey for six weeks to frighten him a little. In the case I had against him, I swore my name was Jane Oldrey, and that I was Oldrey's wife. Oldrey once told me he had heard his wife was dead, and had a telegram to say so. I have never seen his wife. Quint never said to me he would not give up the machine until he got authority from Oldrey. I was married to Oldrey in the Registrar's Office, Auckland, and Mr and Mrs Hitchins were the witnesses to the marriage. John McDonald Sims, sworn, deposed —On behalf of Mrs Coate3 I demanded a sewing machine from Quint which he refused to give up until he consulted his wife. The next;morning Quint being in bed, I went to ask him about the machine again and he refused to give it up until he heard from Mr Oldrey. The Bench said he could see there was a bad feeling between the parties. He suggested the matter should be settled. It seemed very hard plaintff should be deprived from using the machine as it wus her mode of living. Mr Brassey said there was no case before the Court, and applied for a npnsuit. ~ - rJho Bench said Mr Brassey had not proved plaintiff to be Oldrey's wife. Mr Brassey : I will put i'u the marriage certificate.

Mr Miller objected to the putting ia

ot the documenJ^^^K Jong argument then ensued jj^^VMr Miller and Mr Brassey, af^^^Bßlr Miller withdrew; his objecti|^^^Khe document was put' in eviden^^^H^ Chftrl^^^Hgaint, sworn, deposed—l am tb^^BpKlant. I have heard the evyj^^Hßtiv.e to the machine. • I had in writing to take possession things. Nothing wasexcepted. was given at the Victoria I refused to hand over the goods H^use I don't know Mrs Coates in the Bansaction, and I require Mr Oldrey's 'order to hand them over. Mrs Oldrey is half sister to my wife. Mrs Oldrey bought the machine, and there is £7 odd owing on it. I refuse to deliver the. machine up, because she never asked it, and because Oldrey is in my debt. The' machine is now in my, house and I have given a bill of sale over all the property in my house. William Fraser, sworn, deposed—l am lI.M. for Hauraki. I possess no communication from Oldrey relative to goods and chattels. I had a communication rej some native affair. Oldrey himself told" me hia wife was living, and said he cleared out to prevent an action of bigamy being entered against him. The counsel on both sides having been heard, the Bench gave judgment for plaintiff and costs, £3 9s. ■ Mr Brassey applied for leave to appeal, which was refused. Court adjonrned.