Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

CHARLESTON NEWS.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, CHARLESTON. (Before Chas. Broad, Esq., R.M.) "Wednesday, April 8. John LinJclater was fined twenty shillings for being drunk and disorderly. CARROLL V. KLEIN 1 . Mr Home appeared for the plaintiff. According to the latter's statement it appeared that about twelve months' ago, defendant instructed him to purchase the Albion Hotel and pay a deposit, and he now claimed £23 ss, being 5 per cent commission on £250, and £lO deposit paid to Messrs Sturt and Eoyn. He understood the purchase was really for Mr R. Or. Neale. The defendant denied his liability, stating, having been instructed by Mr Neale to buy the property named; he asked Carroll to pay a deposit, but next day he asked Mr Foyne to allow the purchase to stand over until Carroll had communicated with Neale; this he agreed to, and defendant went away to the Buller and Hokitika, and never heard anything more about the affair for some months.

Mr Peter Elliott Baid—He heard the defendant tell plaintiff to pay a deposit and any other expenses concerning the purchase, and Mr Sturt of Messrs Sturt and Foyne, stated he had sold the property through Carroll, as per agreement produced, receiving a deposit of £lO, which, as the agree-

ment was never carried out, he returned as a forfeit.

W. It. Neale being called, said—He never authorised the defendant to purchase a house for him, but had been in communication with Carroll about it.

His Worship gave judgment for £lO and costs. FAIR AND M'COT V. ELLEN" KELLY.

This was a claim of £22 Is Gd for goods supplied, which was partly heard on Monday, and adjourned to this for production of further evidence. Mr Home defended and Mr Johnston appeared for the plaintiff. The Magistrate was unsatisfied as to proof of delivery, and nonsuited the plaintiff with costs. WELSH V. REEVES. Settled out of Court. BARRON V. ELLIS. No appearance of plaintiff, who was nonsuited with costs. GODFREY Y. WALLER. Claim, £25 ss. Judgment for plaintiff by default.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WEST18680409.2.14

Bibliographic details

Westport Times, Volume II, Issue 216, 9 April 1868, Page 2

Word Count
339

CHARLESTON NEWS. Westport Times, Volume II, Issue 216, 9 April 1868, Page 2

CHARLESTON NEWS. Westport Times, Volume II, Issue 216, 9 April 1868, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert