MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 234, 26 June 1908, Page 4

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

POLICE CASES. (Before Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M.) DRUNKENNESS. Mr. Riddell, S.M., yesterday convicted and discharged a first offender for drunkenness, and fined another 55., in default 24 hours' imprisonment for a similar offence. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. ' Alex. Cardell, a well-dressed middle-aged man, was fined £5, in default ono month's imprisonment, for having been guilty of disorderly conduct whilst drunk at Courtonay Place. SHIP DESERTION. Charles Barkley and James Sinclair, duly articled seamen on the barquo Vuceros, admitted having unlawfully left their employment. ' Tho accused wero convicted and ordered to' pay costs, and be returned to their ship. ALLEGED THEFT OF UNDERWEAR. ; Tho hearing of tho case against William Gnnn M'Kay, which had been adjourned from tho previous day, was continued. Accused was charged with having on or about April 6, 1908, stolen from tho vessel Blenheim a quantity of underclothing valued at £7 145., tho property of Ross and Glendining. - Geo. Wilkinson, chief officer of the steamer Blenheim, 'gave cvidenco of tho receipt of the goods 011 tho vessel. Accused was em l ployed in the work of loading. Mr. AVilford, for tho accused, submitted that the caso ought to bo dismissed. His Worship pointed out that tho evidence for thc> prosecution stood unchallenged. Tho evidence in regard to tho identity of tho goods might not be conclusive, yet it was sufficient to rcquiro accused to stand his' trial. It was not for the Lower Court to My whether ho was guilty or innocent. What it _ had to clo was to ascertain whotlior a prima facie case had been made out. The accused, who reserved his defence, was committed for trial, bail boing allowed in a cash deposit of £120.

ALLEGED FALSE PRETENCES. Arthur Joseph Wicks, musician, who had been arrested in Sydney, was charged with, on Juno 5, having obtained money from tho following persons by mean.-, of valueless cheques Arthur Illingworth Grabham, £5 Ambrose John Hum, £4 16s. 6d.; Robert Willoughby Armit, £3 12s. 6d.; and Francis Frod Grady, £4. Mr. Neavo, who appeared on behalf of the accused, asked for a remand until July 1.. • Chief Detective M'Grath said that no objection was offered by tho police. Tho remand was' granted accordingly; Counsel then asked that accused should bo admittod to bail. Tho Chief Detcctive-mentioned that, the total amount alleged to havo been fraudulently obtained by tho accused .was £40. Bail was allowed: accused in £50 and one surety of £50 or two of £25 each. VAGRANCY.' Cissy Knight, Mary Jany Hill, Harold Spencer, and Patrick O'Brien; alias Jamos Sehultz, pleaded not ■ guilty to a charge of being rogues and vagabonds in that they were found by night without lawful'excuso in a liouso at Rosoneath, tho property of Ann Tanner. James Dixon, employed by J. H. Betlnmo and Company,- 'stated that the houso in question was unoccupied. No ono had any authority into tho building. A man named Clark had secured the keys; but had not routed tho placo. - ■ Constablo Caririody gavo evidence that some persons had • occupied the" houso for about a, fortnight.,. Consequent on a complaint hoing, mado, ho. visited tho houso, whore'ho fouhd tho'accused. -' For the defence,; Spencer stated that; ho. rented a' room in tho houso 'from a mannamed Clark; who was at present in gaol. OBrieiv assorted that tho other accused invited ;him to havo supper ; with them. Tho femalo accused ! preferred. not' to givo evidence. ■ His'Worshjp. said lie was not prepared to convict O'Brien as his statements had not been: contradicted. Spencer would bo' convicted and sentenced .to three months' imprisonment, with hard labour. Hill was ordered to bo imprisoned for six months, and knight, who. declined to becoino an inmato of the Salvation Army Home, was sentenced to a similar term. • ,

CIVIL BUSINESS. QUESTION OF CONTRACT. AN UNUSUAL CASE. Mr. ; Riddell, S;M., yesterday gavo judgmorit lu the caso of Smith and Smith versus Ji. Ivyett, a claim for £24 4s. lid. for mattonal .supplied and work dono. There was no discrepancy; His Worship said,. between tho evidence of tho parties. Both wero agreed that the defendant wanted his homo papered, and asked the plaintiffs' manager to look at tho rooms and givo him an estimate of the cost. The manager was not prepared to do this, and suggested another form of arrangement, which was apparently acquiesced in by the defendant. The plaintiff said tho arrangement wa3 that tho defendant had to purchase the papers from his firm at • prices suitablo to himself, and that after this selection tho plaintiff would supply labour at' tho ruling rato to completo the papering of' the defendant's house. Tho dofendant stated that tho plaintiff had agreed to do the wholo work at a reasonablo'price, leaving the choice and price of tho paper to the defendant.' Thero was no doubt about somo arrangement having beon come to betweon the parties, judging from subsequent acts 011 tho part of both, but what tho exact terms wore was not very clear. However, part of tho arrangemont was carried out. Tho defendant selected papers to suit himself,"and tho plaintiff forwarded them to his house, and immediately afterwards sent workmen to carry out the second part of tho arrangemont, but before it could bo comploted the houso was de-stroyed-W fire. Tho balance of tho contract thus became incapable of performance, and tho defendant refused to pay for tho paper supplied and tho work done,' on tho ground that' the,contract was an entire one, and must bo completed beforo payment, was due. No contract price was agreed on, nor was any timo of payment mentioned, and it was obvious that whatever might bo the total cost, tho price of tho paper could not bo determined until after it had been selected, or tho cost of the labour required to place it on tho walls ascertained until tho whole work was completed. The ■ question for decision was whether the arrangements entered into and partially carried out amounted to. an ontiro' contract or a divisible ono.

After referring at somo length to decisions bearing on tlw case, his Worship said that in the present case the arrangements and acts of both parties with regard to the paper ending with tho delivery of it by the plaintiff at tlio defendant's houso seemed. to him to amount to a salo, under which tho property in it passed to tho defendant, and that ho could aftor delivery have dealt with it in any way ho choso. The caso was altogether different from one whero an article required to bo manufactured by 0110 party before boing used upon tho proporty of tho other, and although not freo from doubt, yet ho thought the contract was divisible, and tho plaintiff was onfcitled to recover for tho paper supplied. _ Tho claim for labour and other materials was on a difforent footing. Plaintiff could not rccovor for these unless ho had completed tho work undertaken. Judgment would bo given for tho plaintiff for £17 3s. 6d., with costs £2 6s. Tho defendant was granted leave to appeal, security being fixed at £10 10s, in addition to tlio amount of judgment. , Mr. D. M. Findlay appeared for plaintiffs and Mr. T. Young for the defendant. (Before Dr. M'Arthur, S.M.) UNDEFENDED CASES. Dr. M'Arthur, S.M,, gave judgment for .plamtifis, hy default, in the following un-

defended civil oases:—Commercial Agency, Ltd., and Thos. Horton v. James Conolly, for £1 lGs., with costs £1 55.; Frederick Rouse, Robert Black, and Henry Gilbert Black v. Tlios. Walker for £1 Is. (id., with costs 125.: I'roiisoßros. and Co. v. Sidney Bethell and Sydney Guy for £31 4s. 6d., with costs £3 65.; John Iligg and Co. v. W. Copeinnd for 7s. 10d., with costs 55.; Alfred Richardson Meek v. Reginald Walter Beadnall for £40 10s. 5d., with costs £2 145.; Fordo and Co. v. Charles Herdnian for £9 10s., with costs 235. Gd.; Hntt County Council v. Benjamin Mantell for £2 15s. 4d., with costs 10s.; Hutt County Council v. Henry A. Hurrell for £2 lis. 10d., with costs 55.; Hutt County Council v. Win. Duncan for IC3. 6d., with costs 55.; Ycrex, Barker, and Finlay, Ltd., v. Wm. Homo for £12, with costs 30s. 6d. ;Yorex, Barker, and Finlay, Ltd., v. John Lane, sen., for £1, with costs 55.; Yerex, Barker, and Finlay, Ltd., v. Antonio D. Vannini for 7s. 9d., with costs 55.; James Cluloiv v. Watney Sibun for £1, with costs 55.; Robert 1). Elliott v. Percy Pirani for £2 15s.,_ with costs 10s.; Mary.Edith Logan v. -Pcrcival M'Leod for £5 15s. Gd., with costs 255. Gd.; Kahn and Kahn v-. Sarah Little for £1 with costs 55.; Mary K. Abbott v. Mary Barnard' for £3 15s. and possession of tenement, with costs 16s.

JUDGMENT SUMMONS CASES. Thomas Henry Macauley was ordered to pay £20 os. Gd. to tile 'trustees of the New Zealand Central District Independent Order of Rechabites on or before July 9, in default 14 days' imprisonment. No order was made in the caso in which Robert Westfield sought to recover £6 from Prank Scfton. __ John E. Mulcahy was ordered to pay £27 os. Gd. to Desmond Fosbory Kettle 'forthwith, in default ono month's imprisonment, warrant to be suspended so long as judgment debtor paid 10s. per week. DEFENDED-CASES. CLAIM FOR SERVICES RENDERED. An action brought by Albert Sydney Watson, of the Imperial Advertising Agency, against- Thomas, Page, Wallace Herbert Stewart, Albert Geo. Rough, James 0. Rough, Wm. Rough, and AVrn. Percy Rough, was then heard. Tho claim was for £100, which plaintiff alleged defendants had agreed to pay him for services in connection with tho formation of tho Radium Gas Syndicato into a company. !

Mr. Blair appeared oil behalf of tho plaintiff; Mr. Toogood represented defendant Stewart, who asserted that the agreoment was to pay plaintiff only out-of-pocket: oxponses; and Mr. Levvoy, for the other defendants, who did not dispute liability. Judgment was'reserved. DISHONOURED PROMISSORY NOTE. Alfred, Warren, settler, sued Edward B. Stevenson, builder, Shannon, for £14 Bs. 7d., the amount of a dishonoured promissory note. Mr. Vori Haast appeared on behalf of plaintiff. Judgment- was givon for the amount claimed, with costs totalling £2 6s. CLAIM FOR GOODS SUPPLIED. Jane Siegol, dressmaker, brought an ac-. tion against Sarah Waters to recover £19 16s . 6d., tho value of goods alleged to havo been supplied. Tho action, it was explained, arose out of a former case, in which plaintiff claimed £44 Is. against defendant's husband. The present defendant, it was alleged, had pledged ■her husband's credit without his: authority for portion of tho goods. Judgment wasgiven for plaintiff for portion of her claim, and she now proceeded against the present defendant in respect of the balance. . His Worship gave judgment in favour of tho plaintiff for tho amount claimed, with costs totalling £2 Bs. ' , Mr. Hindmarsh appeared for-plaintiff, and Mr. rwolson for tho defendant. .

~- A LODGE DINNER.. , ; The- hearing of tho case .of ,John Dobbo Broughton v. J. Lindsay and J. Aston on behalf of the Grand Orango Lodge North Island was concluded. Plaintiff claimed £16 10s. for goods supplied and work-done in connection with a dinner on April 10. Defendants paid £11 ss. into Court in full settlement- of tho claim. Mr. Riddoll, S.M. gavo judgment for £2 2s. 6d., in addition to tho amount paid into Court, and cost's. Mr. Kirkcaldit) appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Jackson for defendants. .