BALCLUTHA.

Clutha Leader, Volume I, Issue 14, 8 October 1874, Page 3

BALCLUTHA.

Wednesday, Septbmbr 30, 1874. (Before E. Carew, Esq., J.P. . There were two charges of drunkenness. In the one case a bail of 20s was forfeited for non appearance. The other was mulcted in a like sum. Macdonald v Carr. — This was an action for ejection,' and a claim of LUi for rent over due* :' • Mr Keid for plainriff, and Mr Taylor for defendant, who pleaded not guilty and hot indebted. Mr keid called— . Reginald Macdonald, the plaintiff, who said he held in fee simple section 6 block IV., township -of Granton, and had . let it to the defendant at a weekly rent of 10s. He was a weekly tenant. He never gave him to under; stand he could have the premises for seven years, or any length of time. At the time of letting defendant said he might be able to purchase the property ' iri seven years, and the pMce named was LI SO, but he (witness) ifever agreed to sell, nor did : he give any* promise to lease it tor any length of time, but was willing to allow him to reiiain on the premises so long* as he paid^the weekly rent. Defendant became bankrupt about April last, and was due rent then. He had never paid any since. He (witness) gave him written: notice to quit through Mr Neville. Mr W. Taylor — He built the house as a speculation, but was probably partly induced to do so through defendant's offer of a good rent. =■ He had got some writihg from defendant as to the letting of the house, but he (witness) never signed any document in connection with the matter. Andrew - Carr, defendant, said he never got any notice to quit the . premises, and was not aware of any one in his house having got such a document. The summons in the present action was the firljt notice he had received upon the subject. Arthur Neville,, commission agen t said that on 25th August last he personally handed defendant a written notice to quit the premises. This was . in defendant's shop, and he told him it was a notice to quit he had handed him. Defendant did not open it in his presence. There was no one present. Defendant made the remark at the time that .he had a seven years's lease of the premises. He had no copy of the notice he served upon the defendant. At'- this stage of the case it appeared the defendant had not received notice to produce the document referred to. Mr Reid .therefore asked for a nonsuit which was granted, oneguineaexpens.es being* allowed defendant. .The Court then adjourned.