RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

West Coast Times, Issue 26, 29 July 1865, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Monday, 24th July, 1865. (Before G. S. Sale, Esq., R.M.)

Drunkenness.— Henry Mayo, William JoncsTwiu' 4^" l^'' '^ruu mess, tor tho above offence, wero sei'erally fined 10s, and David Brown and John Clark 20s each ; it was further proved against the latter that he had wilfully broken a window in passing tho Dan O'Coxinell Hotel. .■EW-"ouie of the' psiHW^y.JpatrQyejLwaj\ awarded to the prosecut!Jw»

Tuesday, 25th July. Drunk and Disorderly.— George Spray, guilty of this offence, was fined 10s.

CIVIL CASES.

Chesney v. Learmonth. — Claim for L2O. This case was adjourned to Tuesday, August 22nd, on tho application of Mr O'Loughlin, counsel for the defqndant. Waite v. Sweeney. — Claim for L2O. The plaintiff Jnot appearing, this caso was dismissed, expenses in the sum of LlO being awarded to the defendant by consent of plaintiff's couns jl, Swerybeud v. Hughes. — Claim for L 2 for labor. The defendant, in this case, was Captain of tho Titania, from whose evidenco it appeared that the plaintiff had been engaged six hours assisting to whip out the cargo, and to remain on board till the following tide ; the defendant remained on board during tho night, and in the morning assisted to pump and wash decks, defendant further stated that ho had offered the plaintiff a pound. Judgment for the plaintiff in the sum of 20s and costs. Ash v. Same.— Claim for L 2 2s 6d. This was a similar caso to the previous one. Judgment for plaintiff in tho sum of 20s.

Lloyd Taggart and Co. v. Turoer.— • Claim for L2O. Judgment for plaintiffs in the sum of Lls and costs.

Holder v. Nees and Luscombe. — Claim for L 7. Judgment for plaintiff by consent. Nees and Luscombe v. Kelly. — Claim for LB. Judgment for plaintiffs in tho amount claimed, costs being divided. Kelly v. Solomon.— Claim for L2O. This case was adjourned on tho application of Mr O'Loughlin, defendant's counsel, to Tuesday, 12th August. Chambers and Co. y. M'Laughlin. — Claim for L 4. The plaintiffs wore nonsuited in this case.

jM'Beath v. Davis. — Claim for L 5. (Judgment for the plaintiff, by default, in tho amount claimed, with costs.

Tho following cases were dismissed, there being no appoaranco : — Risk v. Jones and Co. — Levison v. Springborg, and Solomon v. Holmes. '"' Wednesday, Jut/v 27th. (Before G. S. Sale, Esq., R.M.)

Wilful Destruction of Property.— James Dogherty was charged by Richard Russel with wilfully breaking ono of the ■windows in his hotel. Prosecutor stated the offence -was furthor aggravated by the , prisoner having just boforo called for several drinks, refusing to pay for them. His worship awarded tho sum of 10s, tho value of tho window. Thursday, July 28th. Etnbezzlemont. — In this caso Daniel | Joyce prosecuted J. W. Jorre, who was in

his employ as master of th<- tiyJU Squirrel. The prisoner had by, ,-£ mandedonbail for oAe week «.'.'i ibe an. plication of the Inspector of Po •"■«••• l«n- the production ofcvidencf; as to t>u of certain sums to the | accused, amountiu'g to upwards of L4OO. j Captain Robertson and Mr Gavvin wero in attendance to give evidence on this point. At this point Mr Oakes, counsel for tho prisoner, produced an account showing a balance in favor of his client, with which Mr Joyce had expressed himself satisfied, under these circumstances he did not see why the case should be proceeded with. His Worship considered that, for the sake of the prisoner, the account should be produced, and on looking over it observed that on the statement of account Jorre had cheated himself, if anybody, as it showed a balance due to him by Joyce of L 27 12s 4d. It was to bo regretted that Mr Jorre had not rendered this account earlier, which would have obviated all this unpleasantness. In dismissing the caso His Worship signified that Captaiu Jorre left the court without the slightest suspicion being attached to him.