RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thames Star, Volume XII, Issue 4022, 18 November 1881, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

1 THIS DAY. (Before H. Kenrick, Esq., R.M.) a. ©b coubcy poitebton (Registrar) r. MCPIEE. A case against John Me Pike, for the nonrfaccination of his child, was with* drawn ovr payment of costs. 6A3&E, V. TOWEBB. A similar case against William Towers was dealt with in the tmme mancey. SAME V. NEiX. ' . ', ■ , la this case Mr Erassey appeared .tor the defendant and pleaded guilty, but asked for a nominal penalty. His Worship, after taking the evidence of the Registrar, inflicted a fine of os and costs. SAME! V. OTHEBS. Several cases of the same nature were called, .but in each case the Registrar applied to withdraw the summonses.— CIVIL SIDE. JUDGMENTS I'OB PIAINTIIWS, BOItTOKJT. HAXLEN.

Claim, £3 17s. Judgment by confession.—Costs 7s. Mr Cuff applied for a certificate under the Contractors Debts Act. Mr Miller appeared* on behalf of the Borough Council, stating that the Council would be most likely involved in these proceeding if the order were made. It might be disputed that the action was really for labours. The court said this case was really for wagesj and overruled Mr Miller's objection. -

Mr Miller asked for some direction as to how the money was to be paid, as the contractor's sureties had taken the work of completion in hand. The Court was of opinion that the certificate would relieve the Council of their liability, as the order given the contractor assigned the money due to him to the workmen. The certificate would be granted. IBBBTSON & BABBEB V.HANtEN. Claim, £16 for work and labour done. Mr Cuff" acted in this case for the plaintiffs, contending that the Contractors' Debts Act was intended to apply to subcontractors as well as wages men, but this was over-ruled by the Court.—Judgment went by confession for the amount claimed.