RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XVII, Issue 986, 23 April 1862, Page 4

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

CIIRISTCHUttCH — APRIL 15. (Before John Hall, Esq., R. M,) ASSAULT — OSBOBNE V. HEMMINGS. Mr. Travers appeared for the accused. The offence was admitted, and an apology tendered. The case was therefore withdrawn on accused paying the costs, ss. HALLARD V. OAKKS. Mr. "Wynn Williams appeared for the defendant. The plaintiff claimed £10 12s as damages in consequence of defendant's illegal detention of £5, two panel doors, and a baker's peel and rake. The plaintiff, on being sworn, stated that he had handed the £5 to defendant's barman, to be paid to a Mr. A. J. Raphael, that defendant had received the amount from the barman, and when asked by plaintiff if he had paid it to Raphael, said he was not sure (Letter from defendant to plaintiff produced corroborating this statement). When he applied to Raphael for the amount, he denied having received it. Defendant had entered into an arrangement to pay for the goods in question, but had not done so. Win, Pitt stated that he had heard defendant tell plaintiff he had only chaffed him out of the panel doors. Defendant, J. P. Oakes, on being sworn, stated that he had paid the £5 to Raphael, that the goods in question were fixtures, and he did not think he could be compelled to pay for them. Alfred Isaac Raphael was next sworn. After displaying a considerable amount of unwillingness to answer directly the questions put to him, this witness said he had received £5 from defendant on account and that he was quite willing to hand it over to plaintiff, Mr. Williams contended that defendant had been sued wrongfully by plaintiff for the £5. The £1 claimed for the baker's peel and rake he had paid into court, and he asked the Bench to decide whether the panel doors were fixtures or not. The Bench agreed with Mr. Williams as to Raphael being the proper person to be sued for the £5. There was no doubt plaintiff had been badly treated in the matter, and that it was competent for plaintiff to sue him for the £5 in default of payment, and also any expenses he had been put to. Inasmuch as there had been a contract on defendant's part to pay for the panel doors, proved by an. independent witness, the question of their being fixtures did not arise. Judgment for £4 12s, and costs, £2 9s Wm. Harrison admitted a charge of drunkenness, and was fined 10s. Several dabt cases were disposed of during the day. .