RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Westport Times, Volume III, Issue 463, 9 February 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Saturday, Feb. 6. b (Before J. Griles, Esq., R.M.) cl ciyil oases. t Seaton v. M'Laren.-—A claim of £2O, the value of a horse, saddle, and bridle. Mr Pitt appeared for the plaintiff, a and Mr Tyler for the defendant. j. Mr Pitt, in stating the case, said it j was a peculiar one, inasmuch as it in- c volved the question of the Ifgality or £ illegality ot raffles. The question ( would arise, but it did not, after all, f materially affect the case. Because ] if raffles were not legal here, the t ownership of the horse never passed t from the plaintiff. If, on the other , hand, raffles were not illegal, the \ defendant in this case never was en- j titled to the horse. Under either aspect, the defendant could not estab- , lisli his right to the horse. The facts \ were as follow:—A short time ago ] the plaintiff, Mr Seaton, organised a raffle in which the prizes were a nugget, ] which was to become the property of , the highest thrower, and a horse, 1 saddle, and bridle, which were to become the property of the lowest thrower. Among the persons who took shares was one who signed himself "J. C. P." "When "J. C. P." was called, at the time of the raffle, a , person who was present represented . himself as the holder of the share, and ' was allowed to throw. He threw so , low a number that it became a marketable share, and M'Laren bought his chance for £5. It proved to be the lowest number, and, under the impression that the person whose sharewasthusdisposedofwas " J. C.8," Mr Seaton delivered up the hose. Immediately afterwards Mr Seaton discovered that Mr Paton, and not the person referred to, was " J. C. P." , The person who had thrown had broken his leg in the interval, but he was seen t at the hospital and he expressed himself sorry for the mistake, and willing to return the £5. Mr M'Laren was also seen, and promised to go to the person ' from whom he bought the chance, but subsequently he refused to give up L the horse, and continued to do so. J Mr Tyler applied for a dismissal of ' of the case, or a nonsuit. He asked ' that it should be dismissed on the ground that the whole proceeding was 3 illegal, and any claim made in conneel tion with it was null and void. And, i if it were legal, he asked for a non--3 suit. It could not be pretended that e AJr Seaton was the winner of the horse. 3 " J. C. P" was the winner of the r horse, and the plaintiff was not enB titled to sue. -j Mr Pitt contended that it was not * necessary to go into the question of s the legality of the proceeding. The horse must be the property of somebody, and there wa3 nothing to show . that -anyhody but Mr Seaton was in possession of the horse, and, even as bailee, he would have such a qualified possession as to be entitled to sue. The Magistrate thought there was ° some force in the objections taken, but, before deciding, he preferred to hear o the facts of the case; and evidence was n accordingly called, e After the evidence Mr Pitt and Mr Tyler addressed the Court, Mr e Tyler animadverting strongly upon the s conduct of the plaintiff in making the affidavit under which the defendant had been arrested. The Magistrate reserved his decision.