RESIDENT MAGISTATE'S COURT.

Westport Times, Volume II, Issue 170, 15 February 1868, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTATE'S COURT.

Friday, February 14. Before J. Giles, Esq., M.D., E.M. AND DISORDERLY. John Sneider failing to appeal', forfeited his bail. Julia Lewis was brought up charged with this offence, and two former convictions being proved agaiust her, she was sentenced to seven days imprisonment, and 20s fine for the present offence. John Hare was unable to be brought up owing to violent illness. AMAZONIAN QUARRELS. Elizabeth Norton summoned Jane ioc%CT-forusingabusiveandthreatening language, and for offering to fight her. The evidence which was of a most refined nature was corroborated by John Burgess, the great negro deliuiator, aud by Dr Rockstrow, who expressed his regret at living within earshot of the complainant, was contradicted by the defendant, but the Magistrate inflicted a fine of 10s and costs of summons and subpoenas. DATID LESLIE V. THOMAS STOREY. The Magistrate gave judgment in this case, adjourned from Tuesday, in which plaintiff claimed settlement for two casks beer, supplied to a man named Way, and for which Morey the defendant was collateral security, and in doing so, made the following comments. He said the statute of frauds pleaded by the defendant, by which it was ruled that no promise of collateral security was valid unless reduced to writing, besides being the law of the land, was a most equitable clause, but in cases like the present, .might lead to endless litigation. He thought that sufficient evidence had been shewn by the plaintiff that the beer was really sent AVay, more on defendant's promise to pay than anything, but it was clearly shown that he expressly wished Leslie to ask Way for the money before coming to him for it. He therefore ordered judgment to be recorded for the plaintiff, but allowed time for the payment to be made.

H.IGHT TO CHARO-E TOLL. Malcolm v. Stevenson, standing over for judgment from Tuesday, was decided by the Magistrate yesterday. Mr Tyler appeared for plaintiff; Mr Pitt for defendant. The Magistrate said that in this case, in which plaintiff sued defendant for toll, he had delayed judgment, as it was a case of great importance, not only the parties themselves but also to the great public. With regard to the defence set up that the track was not in a fit state, it was a difficult thing to declare what degree of deficiency was necessary before a track could be called bad, but it seemed that defendant had gone on using it, and had never given an notice to plaintiff telling him that the track was not in a good state of repair, and that consequently his

protection was forfeited, but had onlyrefused to pay when his bill had amounted to a considerable sum, and when ho had been pressed for payment . Ho should give judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed (less three items contracted before plaintiff's grant was gazetted), and costs. Another case of a liko nature was also decoded, with the redaction "of the same items as the last case. Wood v. William.? and Oo. —Plaintiff represented by Mr Tyler, and Mr Pitt appeared for the defendant. Wood had supplied two sets of skittle pins and balls, a case of geneva, and other things to defendant, and ho now sued for judgment, as defendant pleaded not indebted. The evidence took up a considerable time, and mainly turned upon whether Jones, who was some time since a patner of Williams', had any right in the property charged for by woods, and whether the order for the goods supplied was given to the defendant. Frederick Jones and Gibson were examined m support of plaintiff's evidence, but no witnesses were called by Mr Pitt for the defence, though it was proved that Jones had also rendered a bill for the goods to defendant. The magistrate remarked that it was in evidence that Williams ordered the goods, had used them, and was now in possession of them, and that Jones having given a bill to the defendant did not make his liability to

Wood for his hand labor any the less, he therefore should order judgment for plaintiff for amount claimed and usual costs. KEFUSIJTO TO PAY THE BAKER. Felix West sued JFreeman, lately a carpenter in the Buller, for payment of a bread bill. The defendant did not appear, and judgment was ordered for plaintiff. Several cases came on for hearing, but as there was no appearance of either party, they were struck out, except one which was reinstated, viz., Mary Ann G'Dea v. Mr Campbell, who appeared for plaintiff, stated that Mr Tyler, who appeared defendant and who was in Court when the case was called on, knew that he was engaged as counsel in the case, and should have given the magistrate notice.