RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. (Before G. Fitzgerald, P.M.)

West Coast Times, Issue 158, 21 March 1866, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. (Before G. Fitzgerald, P.M.)

' Tuesday, 20th March. Disorderly Conduct — Win. Harbinson was charged with creating a disturbance in a house at the back of Quadri's West ♦ Coast Hotel, Revell- street. Sergeant v Hickson, sworn, said that he had heard cries of murder proceeding from the house, and that on entering he found the prisoner lying on the floor, bleeding from a severe » cut over the left eye. The prisoner had had a quarrel with his wife, and said that she had struck him with a porter bottle. The sergeant stated that the people living ' in the neighbourhood had more than once complained of the disorderly conduct of the inmates of the house. Prisoner discharged with a caution. Dkunk and Disorderly. — William Jacks was fined £1 for this offence, or in default forty-eight hours' imprisonment, with hard labour. Assaulting and Resisting tub Police in the Execution op their Duty. — Joseph Chase was charged with assaulting Serx gcant Clements, whilst he was in the act of taking the last prisoner, William Jacks, to the watchhouße. Fined £2, or, in default, seven days' imprisonment, with hard labour. Unregistered Dogs.— Thomas Montagu aud Patrick' Maguire were charged with having two unregistered dogs in tneir post- seacnoii. The charge against Montagu was dismissed, as the dog did not belong to him but to a man named Lawson. Maguire was fined in the sum of 10s. • Furious Riding in a Public Street.-— Elizabeth Ellis and Ellen Elchell were y' charged with riding furiously down Revellr~ utreet on the evening of Tuesday, the 18th • instant, Fined £2.

CIVII/ CASKS. Berndt v. Fama — An action to recover the snm of £8 13s. for professional services. Summons not served. Summons renewed for the 3rd of April. Glogoski v. .Tones — A claim for £15, for professional services. No appearancecase dismissed. Hoakin* v. Hackett — A claim for £l6ils6d, for two months' board. Adjourned till 22nd instant. Jones and Mcc v. Anderson— The plaintiff sued to recover the sum of £7, money lent. Judgment by default for the amoun claimed and costs 11s. Griggs v. Grey — This was an action to recover the sum of £1 15s, the value of a tent. The plaintiff stated that a friend of his, of the name of Brock, had borrowed the tent of him, nnd lent it to the defendant ; and that Brock bad given bim an order on the defendant for the tent or the value of it — £1 15s. For the defence, it was stated that Brock had left a tent with the defendant Grey, to be sold, and that he, the defendant, had sold it, and given Brock an order for the money on the person to whom he had sold it. Defendant remarked that the tent Brock had left with him was 8 x 10, and that the plaintiff sued to recover the value of a tent 6xß. Judgment for defendant, with costs 4s. Graham v. Jones— Claim for £14, part of the purchase -money of a billiard table. The service of the summons in this case had not been sworn to. Mr South, for the plaintiff, said that he had been informed that a letter had been written by the defendant to the bailiff of the Court, acknowledging the service of the summons. The Resident Magistrate refused to go into the case until the usual affidavit of service had been made. The case was* adjourned till 27th inst. Stevens v. Pearson and Hawkins — A claim for £14 16s, for wages. For the defence it was urged that the account had never been properly rendered. Judgment for the amount and costs 15s, Stout v. Bryant — This was an action to recover the sum of .£8 7s 3d, money lent and money paid on account of defendant. Mr Campbell appeared for the plaintiff. The plaintiff stated that she had lent the defendant the sum of £5, to pay for his board and lodging whilst at an hotel, and that she had also washed his clothes and bought flannel for the purpose of mending them. She also stated that she had, at the defendant's request, bought 13lb. of pork for a Mrs King — in all, amounting to the sum of £8 7s 3d. The defendant acknowledged having borrowed the sum of £5, which he was prepared to pay, hut denied having given the plaintiff any authority to purchase meat. He believed that part of the goods alleged to have been supplied and charged to him were for Mrs King, who had since gone into his service as a barmaid. He admitted part of the washing. Judgment for £6 18s 6d and costs 11s. Luks v. Johnson — A claim for £15, for board and lodging from ]Oth January to 21st February— six weeks, at £2 10a per week. Judgment, by default, for amount claimed and costs 9s. Montagu v. Sharp— Claim £19 16s 2d, goods sold and delivered. appearance — case dismissed. Sommers v. Hinds — The plaintiff sued to recover the sum of £29 14s, for goods sold and delivered Mr South appeared for the plaintiff. The defendant applied for an adjournment, on the ground that he was only served with the summons yesterday at eleven o'clock, and had not had time to file a set-off. Case adjourned till the 22nd inst.