RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURT, TAPANUI.

Tuapeka Times, Volume VII, Issue 433, 10 February 1875, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATES' COURT, TAPANUI.

(Before J. N. Wood, Esq., R.M.) SaTT/BDAT, 6thFBBEUABT. M'Coll t. Mayo. — Claim of £20 for damages sustained through breach of contract to purchase a horse. Mr. Neville for plaintiff ; Mr. M'Coy for defendant. Plea: Not indebted. s Angus, M'Coll, plaintiff, deposed that the defendant had agreed to purchase from him an entire horse, of the value of £90. Defendant was previously to have a trial, but informed plaintiff that he had heard that the horse was vicious, and refused to take delivery. The horse was not more vicious than other entires,, and the plaintiff had lost much time and been put to considerable expense, amounting to over £20, through the bargain not being completed. Cross-examined by Mr. M'Coy — The defendant had not paid any sum on account. There was no memorandum of the contract. Mr. M'Coy submitted that it would only be wasting time to proceed frith the case. The plaintiff's own evidence showed that there was no valid contract. He quoted the 17th section of the Statute of Frauds. Mr. Neville said he would-take a non-suit, and bring on the matter in another form. Mr. M'Coy submitted that rf brought on again, it could only be -with the same result, and defendant would again be put to exnense. His Worship concurred with this view, and dismissed the case, with professional costs. M' Donald v. Mayo. — Claim of £8, for work and labor done. Mr. Neville for plaintiff ; Mr. M'Coy for defendant. John M Donald, painter (the plaintiff), deposed that he had agreed-witbr Mrs. Mayo to paint the outside of her house and a portion of the inside for,- the sum of £IQ, labor only, Mrs. Mayo to fiiid material and" hoard. Tie left before he had finished, as he could not put up -vrith Mm. Maya's language. Sh,e tree

constantly abusing him, and told him to go and whistle for his money when he asksd. for payment. * N

Mr. M'Coy said he thought it unneeemry to cross-examine the witness. He had shown that he had not completed his work, and K» and he could-not recover pro tanto in a contract of this nature. . '~,\\ His Worship said that he did not thinfcth* language.^ Mrs. Mayo justified the ; in leaving his work. He had been skinned, and had better go and finish i£ aiiE then he could get his money. Non-Baited, with professional oosts. " • M'Farlane v. Heap*. — Mr. Neville appeared for plaintiff, and asked for an adjournment until next court day, which was granted. Perry v. Franks. — Mr. Neville for defendant. This case was dismissed, with 15» costs.

John Jenkins forfeited his bail o» a charg* of drunkenness.