MAGISTRATE'S COURT, HAMILTON.

Waikato Argus, Volume VI, Issue 428, 29 April 1899, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT, HAMILTON.

Yesterday.—(Before Captain j;McPherson and Mr A. Primrose, Justices. Debt Cases.—A number of debt cases, in three of which Mr L. O'Neill appeared for the plaintiffs, were dealt with in the usual manner, judgment being given for the plaintiffs in each instance with costs. He also appeared for the defence iu the case, Pennington v. Jos. Radford, and stated that the nutter bad been satisfactorily settled. Judgment Sumhonses.—On the application of Mr O'Neil, judgment summonses were granted in the cases P. Le Quesne v. Scarborough and P. Le Quesne v. John Clarke. Free Insurance. Evidence was taken in the case Brodziack v. J. R. E. Hatrick, which is to be heard at Dunedin Mr A. Swarbrick appeared for the defence.—Defendant's evidence went to show that Mr C. B. Robinson, agent for Brodziack (Australasian Free Insurance System) had otfered for sale a number of policies to cover a period of 7 days only. Defendant said they would be useless to him; but agreed to take 1000 each of a series of policies to cover holders for a week, a fortnight, and a month—3ooo in all—and signed an agreement to that effect, with a clear understanding that the 7-day policies alone were of no use. When the forms arrived in February he found that 3000 7-day policies had been sent. He immediately telegraphed that the forms were not according to order, and refused to accept them on that ground. Referring to the agreement, defendant said if his name appeared on an order for 3000 7day forms, 'it was either a forgery, the smaller numbers had been inserted after he signed the agreement, or his signature was obtained by misrepresentation. He had also been charged higher prices than those quoted at the time of the order. The amount involved, including costs 15s, is £26 14s, aud the case will be tried at Dunedin. F. J. Long v. Pipes and Sheeean.— Mr A. Swarbrick appeared for the judf« ment creditor and explained that in M\rch last, he had obtained judgment for the amount due, £29 6s Id, by confession. Mr Long, he said, had engaged Piper and Sheeran to build a house, and they in turn had employed a sub-con-tractor to do the work. When the work was completed he paid the amount due, but Piper and Sheeran had not handed the money over to the sub-contractor, and Mr Long found himself in the unfortunate position of haviug to pay the latter over again, and now sought to recover the amount;. Since judgment had been obtained £ll had been paid into court, leaving a balance of £lB 6s Id and costs, 27s now due. Judgment debtors had agreed to pay half of the amount in a fortnight and the remainder in a month, but had not done so. Sheeran said he had paid the £ll into court, and considered this to be his share, while Piper said he had only received £lB since Christmas, and although he had money coming to him could not pay until he got it.-The Bench ordered that half fte amount should be paid within 30 i] a y 3 , and the remainder within 60 days; or ia default one month's imprisonment. H. Kelly v. C. Habwood.—Claim £2 10d for coal supplied. Mr A. Swarbrick appeared for the defence and pleaded not indebted. Plaintiff in his evidence stated that Harwood and his men were in the habit of borrowing coal, from hia stand at the rail-vay station. He had seen some of the coal taken, and Harwood's men had informed him that they had taker the remainder, and produced his books to show the amount of indebtedness. Mr Swarbrick asked for a non suit on the ground that plaintiff had produced no legal evidence of any debt. Both parties '■■'ere coal merchants and were in the habit of borrowing coal from one another, and as a matter of fact Kelly was indebted to Harwood. • Plaintiff was non suited with costs (£1 6b).