RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thames Star, Volume X, Issue 3396, 10 November 1879, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Fjfiipat.

(Before H. Kenriek, Esq., R.M.) CIVIL SIDE.

After the 2 o'clock adjournment, the following business was disposed of :— INGLES V. M. URISCOLL. Claim £10 17s 2d, work done. Mr Dodd, for plaintiff, Mr Miller for defendant. £2 11s 3d had been paid into Court. The evidence of the plaintiff was to the effect that he had been employed by defendant on road work and received 19s on account, the amount claimed being the balance duo. In cross examination ho said:—He agreed to build a stone wall in connection with Driscoll's contract for the formation of the Hape Creek road for £4, if the stone ! were provided, and defendant gave him the assistance of a man. He did not carry out the whole of the work on account of a dispute between the contractor and the County Council. The defendant, on being put in the box, deposed that plaintiff had taken the wall contract from him for £4 provided he (plaintiff) had the services of a man. One of the councillors objected to the manner the work was being done, and plaintiff threw up the contract, and the work he did do had to bo pulled down. Ffo denied agreeing to give the plaintiff £8 for the work done.

Judgment for plaintiff, £118s Id (with amount paid iuto Court), and coits.