CHRISTCHURCH.

Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9433, 3 June 1896, Page 3

CHRISTCHURCH.

Tuesday, June 2. (Before R. Beetham, Esq., S.M.) . Civil Casks.—Woodhouae v Brown, ofoim £13 15a. Mr Fisher for the plaintiff, Mr Loughrey for the defendant, an innkeeper at Springston, who, ia the exercise of hia alleged right by a publican's lien, had, by the detention of two horses, compelled the plaintiff to pay a debt incurred by a third person by whom the horses had been brought to the defendant's hotel. The evidence had been taken at a former sitting, and a»*gumen t was now heard. Mr Fisher submitted that as the third person had, by epecial agreement, contracted with .defendant for the board aud lodging of himself and his stable boy, and the hire of three stalls in a stable, the publican's lien was not available. Authorities were quoted, and judgment was given for the plaintiff with costs, £3 ss. Saville and Co. v Reid, claim £15, the purchase money for a bicycle. Mr Caygill appeared for the defendant, who pleaded that the machine was taken subject to approval, and judgment was for her, with coats £2 ss. Hill v Zouch, claim £1 Ba, the value of a block and die for printing labels. Mr JBeatbie appeared for the plaintiff, for whom judgment was given tor £1 ss. There was a counter claim by defendant for £1 5s for printing, on which he was given judgment. The costs in both ckima were divided, leaving plaintiff to pay 2a. Stewait v Hubbard, Hall and Co., claim £6, the value of thirty cases of apples. Mr Cieaswrell appeared fir the plaintiff, Mr Bruges for the defendants. The defence was that the plaintiff agreed to supply good marketable fruit, a condition which he did not fulfil, the apples being small and of inferior) quality. There had not been any inspection before purchase by the r jdsfendant of bjuik or In Txigga v Hubbard, Hall aud Go., claim £8 for forty cases of apples, the facts were similar, except that Mr Hubbard had seen the apples in bulk before buying. £5 2a 8d had been paid into Court, for which amount judgment was given for the plaintiff, who was ordered to pay half coste. In Stewart's case judgment was for the defendants without costs, and the apples to be returned to the seller. In Church Property Trustees v Laraoo, claim £3 10s, judgment was for plaiutiffa by default with costs. Moore v Uostoa was adjourned till August 25th.