MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 472, 2 April 1909, Page 9

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before Mr..G.Vßidd'cil.' .' IMPROPER LANGUAGE AND ASSAULT. A young man named Wm. Chas; Watson, alias Wilson, alias Filewood, alias Williams, was charged (1) with having used obscene language in the bar of the Foresters' Arms Hotel, anil (2) with having unlawfully assaulted Win. Linley. Accused pleaded guilty to both charges. It was stated by the police that accused had teen loafing about the city for some time. He went to the hotel and asked for a drink, . which was was'given, him.. He weiit back. later and demanded another drink, whieh was refused. He then used the language complained of, und when he was being turned out of the hotel, assaulted .Mr. Linley. . On the first charge accused was sentenced to one month's imprisonment, and, on tho second charge, he was sentenced to 14 days' imprisonment, tho sentences to be concurrent. A TAILOR IN .TROUBLE. For haying been found, at'll.3o at night in & tram shed at Oriental'-Bay a middle-aged man named John Chambers was sentenced to ; three months' imprisonment.- ' : Station-Sergeant Darby informed the Court that accused had been sleeping out in shed« and outhouses at Oriental Bay for some time past. Ho had been cautioned by the.police i s il ?°t and Showed his appreciation of the warning by heaping abusive language en the-head of the officcr. He was a tailor by trade, and a good tradesman, but would .not work. -INSOBRIETY. . Violet Paton, alias Frazer,' deemed to be an habitual drunkard, pleaded guilty and asked loi a chalice to leave the city and go to her people, who reside in the country.' His Worship adjourned the case until this mornm» to give accused an opportunity of leaving town .within 24 hours. John Joseph Dillon, charged with insobriety, was convicted and fined 10s., with the option of IS hours' imprisonment. One hrst offender was fined 10s., - and three others were fined 55., in default 21 hours' im- • pnsonment.

CIVIL BUSINESS

(Before Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.) UNDEFENDED CASES. ' Judgment was entered for plaintiff by default of • defendant in tho following civil cases:— , Universal Supply Co., Ltd., v. Marv Ann Daly, possession, "or ,£3 3s. 6d., costs lis.; Jane \Vilcox v. Edward Henry Eton, £2 2s. Gd., costs 10 s.; Mary Edith Logan, executrix of the si i,.° '" m - A. Xogaii, deceased, v. Fredk. Wm. Cidlimore, ,£9 10s. Cd„ costs £1 3s. 6d.; P. -tiayman and Co. v. Teresa Briggs, .£7 9s. lid costs £1 3s. Gd;; Alcock and Co. v. W. Hall £7 10s. T 2d., Coßts.il. 3s. Gd.; fc. Eraser fchortt, Ltd., v. Alfred Mitchell, 13s. sd„ costs 10s.; Commercial Agency,. Ltd., v. Smyth Bros., costs only, 12s. ; Veitch and Allan v. Norman tlout, 3s. lOd. costs 10s.; Townsend and Pa til, o T '„T h ? s - G; - 'Stringer, JC6 Us. 2(1., costs .il 3s. Gd. ;-same_..v.. David Martin, ,£1 15s. / *," i C , OSt n, los ' ! 9 lty Printin K Co. v. Tlios. Hov, A 1 13s. 9d.; flost3(ss. ; ; same v. Henry J. Hall'inan, .£3 2s.' Gd.J costs 55.; Trocadero, Ltd., v. John Wm. Mackay, i£3, costs 10s.; P. R. Russell and Co.'-v. J. 'J. Fitzpatrick, .£25 7s s, cost * same v. H. L. Marsh, Us. M; costs,, 25.; John Paterson v. Arthur T Dick, .£5 35., costs ,El 3s. Gd.; Frank Dakin 'v. Alfred Bnckell, £5 55., costs £1 3s. Cel.; Oliver llewlnnney v. Alfred E. Edwards, ,£9 12s. Gd., costs „C 1 3s. Gd.; Robt. Martin, Ltd., Tr fi , Read,; ,£3O 1Gs -> costs ,E2 17s.;.Walter Holland v. George Cooper, £20, costs .£2 14s. JUDGMENT. SUMMONSES. In the judgment summons case Henry JesBupv. Jas. Regal, a debt of ,£26 Is., debtor was ordered to pay,on or before April 15, in default a. days imprisonment. In. the case Wellington Gas Company v. David Barne, a debt of <£2 18s. Bd., debtor was ordered to pay on or before April 15, in default three days imprisonment. iMo orders were made in the following ca-es:— Corns'Wm. Bell y Frank Cecil Matthews, a u i?'° s ' !'''•> Arthur Clarke, Ltd., v. \\ alter Bray, a debt of ,£1 l is. 2d. DEFENDED CASES. ' (Before, Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.) TWO PEDESTRIANS COLLIDE. / . , n . n l' SU! i} class of collision caso was ono •' wh i l0 Mo & I S°- „ Han cock (Mr. Hindmarsh) claimed .£l9 10s. from Arthur Guthrie. Plaintiff, a newspaper seller, claimed that owinr to the negligence of defendant, ho (plaintiff) was knocked down in Manners Street, injuries to his head, Which incapacitated him from work,, and forced him to bo under medical care for some time. It appeared that defendant was running to board a tramcar near the Opera House, when ho collided with" plaintiff, and knocked him down on the wood blocks. ' Defendant denied tho allegation of negligence, saying that Ho was running after tho tramcar .whan a Durely accidental collision occurred.

He recognised tlmt plaintiff had suffered, and offered him .C 7 Ms. to compensate him. His Worship hold , that, if a man ran after a tram, ho ,must tako cars that ho did not run into peaceable and quiet citizens. Judgment would bo for plaintiff for .£l2 10s., and costs i' 3 ss. 6dj. .

A CHEESE-CUTTER AND COMPUTING • SCALES.

(Before Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M.) Avison and Williams, grocers, trading as the Town and Country Supply Stores, claimcd ■£!!! from Edward Cain, of Blenheim, grocer, prico alleged to have been agreed upon for a cheesecutter and a set of computing scales, sold and delivered by plaintiffs to defendant on January S, which prico defendant had refused to For Hie defencc it was contended that this was a sale of goods by description, and that no property in tho goods passed until tho defendant had had a reasonable opportunity, of examining them for tho purpose of ascertaining whether they were in accordance with tho description. Consequently it was urged, defendant was entitled to reject tho goods, and there was no sale. His "Worship reserved hjs decision. Mr. Bunny appeared for plniutifFs and Mr. Goulter for defendant.

A LESSON IN HORSE-DEALING. ■

PORTEII AND PONY-RACING. A decision of more than usual interest was given bv Dr. A. JL'Arthur, S.M., in tho case Chas. Beuth (Mr. Dunn) v. Thomas Dwyer (Mr. • Herdman). Jf f Plaintiff stated that ho was tho owner, of a chestnut liiara named Mutiny, fire stall shoes and plates, two pairs of boots, and horse rugs. The defendant was in possession of tho niare and accessories, and had wrongfully and, without legal justification refused to deliver them to plaintiff. Plaintiff therefore sought judginent for possession, or, in case possession could not bo had, for JMO, the value of-the horse, .£2 2s. 3d., the valuo of tho accessories, and .£2O, damages for detention. _ . Tho case was somewhat interesting, said his Worship, as throwing a flashlight on that socalled sport, pony-racing. An hotel night-porter of this city was anxious to become tho owner of a pony for racing purposes, and instructed an undischarged bankrupt of Masterton to purchase him a good one. The said undischarged gentleman, the defendant, just one week after his bankruptcy, purchased "a good one" for ,£l2. Ife said that ho got the money to purchase from a bicycle-dealer who, just one week ago, had judgment given against him in that Court for .£l3O and costs. The defendant now claimed that lie bought the horse on shares for himself and tho night-porter, and sought to chargo tho. latter ,-£2O for ono half of the horse, which he bought for <£12. In addition to this he charged his "partner" with all the keep, etc., of the horse, making a total of .£73 18s. Gd. in about three months, and he acknowledged receipt of- ,£2l 15s. On tho other hand the hotel porter claimed to have paid the defendant not" less'than 4M3 15s. from' November 28, to December 22. The horse won a stake' of *617, which the defendant, of course, • had retained. 1 The hotel porter's financial man was his brother, a labourer, who advanced the moneys paid, and to whom tho . porter assigned all interest in.the horse in .. consideration of tho ndvanco of several sums, amounting in all to .£22. The defendant, his Worship said, began with a fraud in charging his "partner" .£2O for one-half of a horse which cost Xl 2. .On November 2G tho defendant telegraphed: "Wire twonty; have secured beautiful pony; maiden;' send to-day certain.—Dwyer." There was no mention here of shares. On November. 28 he wrote to tho porter: "The pony looks right, and in any case wi can sell her for more than you gave. Remember this, destroy this letter directly you read it." The letter, his Worship pointed out, said "for more than you gave," not "we." Again, the horse's fees were received by tho secretary of the racing club in the name of the porter, and wero paid by the porter. At tho railway station, Wellington, when the horse arrived, one witness gave evidenco that tho defendant said to the porter, "what do you think of your pony?"' The defendant acknowledged tho receipt of only such money as was sent to him, and for which lie' well knew acknowledgments had been obtained from the Post Office. On the other' hand, : two witnesses gave evidence that tlioy saw certain "moneys paid to the defendant. - - - His Worship placed no relianco whatever on the defendant's evidence. The plaintiff sued as the owner of the horse, which was assigned to ■ him by his brother, tho' night-porter, in consideration of £22 advanced.. His Worship trusted both of thwii had - had. 'a. lesson in horse-dealing for ponj'-racing purposes. Judgment would*bo.'fbr'',th.o,',possession of the horse and accessories, or,' -in cas6 possession . could not bo obtained, for the sum of *£22 2s. 3d.., The defendant must also pay the plaintiff *810 damages'for "detention. 1 • ' 6 ' THE "NEW OCCIDENTAL" FITTINGS. Reserved decision was given by Dr. A. M'Arthur in tho case Cederholm and Tolley (Mr. Menteath) v. Meyer and Illingworth (Mr. Weston) and Kirkcaldie and Stains (Mr. Herdman). Plaintiffs claimed to recover ,£ll2 6s. for extra work and fittings supplied between March and June, 1903,' in connection with,the erection of tho New Occidental Hotel b.v Meyer and Illingworth' for Kirkcaldie and Stains, and wherefor plaintiff? were tho sub-contractors for the installation pf electric light, bells, and fire alarms. Plaintiffs claim'cd to recover against the_ defendants jointly or, in tho alternative, against the. defendants severally. After, dealing at length with tho specifications and the evidence, his Worship stated that, in his' opinion, the proprietors of tho building, Kirkcaldie and Stains, wero liable to plaintiffs for the fittings claimed, on tho grounds that a certain marginal note in tho specifications referred to all fittings, and that the architcct ordered the' fittings now charged for to be supplied by the plaintiffs. The Court was also of opinion that the extra work charged for was ordered either by Mr. Kirkcaldie, the architect, or the clerk of works, and that the plaintiffs were entitled to payment at i the hands of defendants, Kirkcaldie and Stains. His Worship excepted four items, making a total deduction of *El 2 10s. Judgment would be for plaintiffs as against 'Kirkcaldie and Stains.for .£IOO 65., with costs *610 10s., and for the defendants, Meyer and Illingworth. f . , REPAIRS AND STORAGE. Reserved judgment was v also given by Dr. M'Arthur'in tho case Gifl'crd, Nicholls and Co. (Mr. Hindmarsh) v. Emily Weiss (Mr. Findlay), a claim for ,£5 14s. Gd., t repairs to and storage on a motor-car. His Worship said that as far as he could make out, plaintiff was entitled to £2 15s. 6d., for which he stated he had rendered an account, and the items of which were contained in a book produced. Plaintiff ,was also entitled to .two weeks storage on a motorcar, 155., making a total of .£3 10s. 6d„ for which' amount judgment would bo given. Plaintiff stated that he rendered no further account than that for £2 15s. 6d., and allowed two years to elapso before proceeding, although tho parties were witnin a stone's throw of each other. Costs, *£2 10s., would bo allowed. '