RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuapeka Times, Volume II, Issue 61, 10 April 1869, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

W. ti Sunpion, ifiiq., R.M.) j |^T _;- fAWKDATy AfMfr 3. fs m •* j Police r. Cron^nMt.-M3ronquiiti was; brought 1 lip on remand for issuing a value- j leu cheque to Mr. J. Cranley. James Brown, being sworn, deposed :< . lam ledger keeper in Bank of New Zealand, Dunedin,, I identify the- cheque -. now in myhtads. It was presented at the bank, Dunedin^for payment. I know it by the writing on the back. I don't . recollect the day of presentation. There was no money m the bank belonging to the accused, and, to my knowledge, never was. I don't know ihe Accused. When; a cheque is presented it is my duty to look if there are funds. I did so when this cheque wm presented. *nd there. irerw* no funds.* h ' - ! - • • Examined by accused: All deposits made pass through my ledger from the letter Ato L. There was no deposit of £12 made in your name. i Examined by police: It is usual .to keep a signature book, for parties depositing money. No account is opened unless the signature of depositor is given. I examined the register book when, the cheque wm produced as* well as the ledger. Moneys hare been deposited without the signature, but this rests with ihe manager. I made a thorough -search from A to L, and I say positively that there was no account in the name of the accused; lam bound to knew under any circumstances of any deposits having been made in ledger A to L. The. accused having nothing , to, say, tteing cautioned in the usual manner, was committed to stand his trial at the next sittings of Supreme Court, Dunedin. Monday, April 5.

Police v. Conroy. — Conroy was brought -up on remand. The police asked for a farther remand as they were not prepared, a material witness not having been found. Adjourned for one week. Cowap v. Vernon, —Claim of £20 for damages sustained" by defendant having violated agreement. The plaintiff in this case gave evidence to the effect that on .25th March last he bought a buggy of defendant, giving him in exchange one horse valued at £15, and a cheque for £10. That when he paid him the cheque it was agreed that he should get the use of the horse for a period of six months, And at the end of that time he was to return the hone to defendant. Witnesses having been called, stated that they knew -of the agreement about the sale of horse and buggy. They knew nothing about giving the horse to plaintiff for six .months. They were not present during, the whole of the conversation. DefendJint gave evidence to the effect that he considered that •■ tlie plaintiff had had sufficient value for the money, and that he never coiisented, tq let the plaintiff have th<| horse for six months as sworn. He did say that he had ao objection to let plaintiff have the hone for some time, but he must have the use of him On the

-day after the sale to .carry a lady, to Tuapeka Mouth. Plaintiff had written KSODuy^pements, but he had never read ■pfiifln^TOr less sign them. Verdict for defendant' : - Lyng v. Watson.— Claim of £2 17s 9d for meat aupplied. The books of the plaintiff having been produced there -appeared to be a difference between them and the account sued for, his Worship remarking that there could be no doubt -that the dates were not correct, and that was a most important point in books. The books shewing a balance of 17s 6d 'being due, a verdict wai given for that -amount.

Thursday, April 8.

Cranley ▼.-Cooper.- Claim, £6 llsr 6d. No appearance of defendant. Verdict for amount claimed, with coats ;, failing payment, distress. j - j - Harris v. F. Young. —Claim, £8, for goods sold and delivered, and -admitted. Verdict for amount, with costs. '