RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 169, 4 May 1871, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before W L.Simpson, Esq., R.M.) Thursday, April 27. Donovan v. Lancaster. — Mr. M'Coy fur yLAuVuLI'. No appearance of dc-fprniour This wai an action to recover L 5 10s 6J. for non-delivery of oats, and expenses to Beaumont, &c. Judgment for amount claimed. Monday, May 1. CBefore the same Magistrate.) 22. Lancaster v. Hunter. — Adjourned case. Duncan Beaton, sworn, said — T remember about July last, I received a letter from Lancaster Tt was in reference to an hotel and farm, the property of Hunter, to be sold together or separately. I supposed Lancaster to be acting for me. I wrote to Bryant about it. Bryant spoke to Lancaster. Lancaster then went to Hunter, and made arrangements about the price. Lancaster wioie to me to come down, as Hunter was prepared to sell. X came down in consequence. Lancaster and I went to Hunter. We did not conclude then. l-l v nter said he would take a month to consider about it, and would leb me know. I was fully prepared to purchase when I rirst came down.

In answer to questions from the Bench, witness said — The price agreed upon was L 325. Ido not know if Lancaster was acting for Hunter. It was through Lancaster I became aware that Hunter's place was for sale. R. Lancester, sworn, examined by the defendant — I had other persons besides Beaton in view as purchasers for your hotel and farm. I said in my previous examination that I knew a parson I should like to have in the hotel if you intended leaving. Hunter, sworn, deposed — Lancaster came into the bar of the hotel and asked me if I had made up my mind fo sell. He said there was a man he should like have it, and he asked me the lowest price. I told him cash L 325, and no less. In speaking to Lancaster, I consider I was consulting his wishes. I had other offers in hand. J never employed Lancaster to sell or let my hotel. I never had any agreement about 5 per cent. He appeared to be obliged by my telling him the price I would take. Cross-examined by Mr. Lancaster. — I never went to Waipori or anywhere else to find a purchaser. Mr. Ritchie came to me and enquired the price. I wished to sell the house and farm together. 1 did not go to Mr. Sellars ; he came to me. I did not tell you I wished to get clear of the house. You said you would write or send a man. I understood from Mr. Beaton that he was prepared to buy. I never heard you mention anything about commission from first to last.

The Magistrate, after reviewing the the evidence, referred to the antagonistic statements of plaintiff and defendant, so much opposed to each other ; under the circumstances, he must look to the evidence of a third party, Mr. Beaton, who said that he considered Mr. Lancaster was acting for him, consequently, he (the Magistrate) must dismiss the case with costs. Lancaster v. Strean. — Claim for L 3 10s. Bd., a set-off of L 5 Bs. admitted. Strean put in a declaration of insolvency. Judgment for plaintiff. Execution not to issue at present. M'Kellar v. Macpherson. — This action was to recover upon a dishonoured cheque. Mr. Gooday appeared for plaintiff and called Mr. Jamison, agent for the Bank of New Zealand, who proved the signature to the iheque. Judgment by default. Bryant & Lancaster v. Chaplin & Co., cbach proprietors. No 'appearance of defendant. This was a claim for Lll 53. fid. for the transit by punt across the Molyneux of the Dunstan and Teviot coaches. Judgment for amount claimed and costs. Lancaster v. McLaren. — A claim for L 9 10s. for crossing cattle. Defendant pleaded not indebted, and requested the plaintiff to produce authority to charge. The cattle in question were not crossed in the punt, but swam across within a short distance. Defendant admitted services were rendered by the ferrymen, but said he was induced to avail himself their services because they stated that

if no service was rendered they could charge just the same. R. Lancaster stated that M'Laren had frequently crossed cattle before and never objected to the charges. He should not think of charging unless he rendered efficient assistance. Bryant, ferryman, deposed to having assisted with boats and horses in putting the cattle across. M'Laren said he would pay him when he came down, When M'Laren returned he refused to do so. They were generally assisted by persons residing at the Beaumont. When Xl Laren returned he told him he should charge him LB. On the last occasion M'Laren iried to cross cattlo, but he could not get one to swim ; he had then to punt them. When M'Laren returned he said they had no ri<*ht to charge for swimming, and that he had bet L 5 they could not make him pay. Cross-examined by Mr. M'Laren. — You might have remarked the river was low. I don't recollect j T ou asking me any questions about the difference in the charge between" swimming and punting. I made no mention of having a right to charge within a certain distance of the ferry. Mr. M'Laren deposed that the ferry man told him that he had power to charge the same for swimming as punting. Believing he told the truth, he (M : Laren) made a bet of L 5, which he lost. He had only paid L 7 for 400 head at the Manuherikia. It was a special agreement. The Magistrate said he should not consider the question on the ground of the plaintiffs' right to charge, as a privilege for keeping the punt, but simply for work and labour dime. Judgment for plaintiff for LB.