RESIDENT. MAGISTRATE'S COURT.—Friday. [Before Thomas Beckham, Esq., R.M.]

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXVI, Issue 4061, 27 August 1870, Page 3

RESIDENT. MAGISTRATE'S COURT.— Friday. [Before Thomas Beckham, Esq., R.M.]

Judgments for Plaintiffs.— The Marquis of Hastings- Goldmining Company v. Kuddenklan, claim 18s., calls due ; North Island Goldmining Company v. Hick son, claim 10Z., calls due; Lusk v. Thornton, claim KM. 7s. Bd., an .unsatisfied judgment (defendant agreed to pay 7s. 6d. per week until the amount was ' paid) ; Auckland Consolidated Goldmining Company v. J. A. Lyell, claim 11. 7s. 6d., calls due ;, [Porter and "Co. v. Golden Crown Extended OJoldmining Company, claim 19?, 17s. 2d., , g00d5 . sold and delivered ; Porter and Co. v. Stuart OBrien, claim SI. 10s. 3d., goods sold and delivered; Murdoch v. Montezuma Goldmining Company, claim 121: 45. 6d., wages due. Abjoubnments. — Red Queen Goldmining Company, v. H. Y. Stevens, claim 41. oa. 6d,, calls due ; aame v. L. B. Stevens, claim 15s. B^., calls due ; Brown v. Walters, claim \l. 10s. 7d. ; Adam v. Dixon, claim ' 18s. ; Auckland Consolidated Goldmining Company/ v. ( Buokley, claim 101. Is., calls due.- „ DEFENDED .CAUSES. North Bland Gozoknnya Compant v. HlWlN.— Claim, 25Z.> .calls due upon 100 shares."— Mr. Sneehan fbVilie plaintiff, and Mr. Wynn for Jhe de.fendanir.— F,^C. ,plar,ke and ED.-&.liUsk were eiamifaed at^ohsiaer^ able length, and a nori*ait'.W§a recorded. i] M^EYBBS (TBUSTEBS) $! "A\t 0»A»,-rClaim, 6?.i6s M V,-balance-of anaecount for 'goods sbld.' ' and deliyered.--Mr. Wynn for the pjairitiff." -^l^Orfe!^^ >¥ o^# sn"^;&ceipt' pumorjiiDg to be payment for the goods mow* fdlifor.' The receipt •rf&faipfeQ^ by : one eireer.-as aigent fbr 1 ' Mr. Akfer^/| '^carrier of, ojdi'*t,Q^Ke<WaiiatQ7ji^*yVSt»%#,^ )m^MertieV' defendant keeefrred'Sfche goods;. ttfe'plfcintiff, dir.derni^tfle ggA twt b?^J9fe payment. wWj!io^^,dagn^vand' pbmtitfgl .'duiri^att^ oyercharge^iri^theffacodunt^ hadlnotjemployed' |ny.'pereon.|iam^fcc^

never got payment for the account now sued for.— Judgment for- plaintiff; hia Worship remarking that' the case seemed to,be a hard one, but tha¥p]*ijiti^ .should have brought forward' ifche'ioan'Mercer.' Orapp v. Beissel a#d ABR/LBUJd-7-Olaim 2L'jsfc. r 4cL"]£r. Wynn for the defendants. — A.. M. Orapp deposed that defendants had rented a shop from him for some- vine month*.- When they left the shop the fixtures were ' riot left as the Agreement between plaintiff and defendants provided. The amount claimed , was the cost of re* ' placing the fixtures. — In cross-examination I by Mr. Wynn he .admitted that he was charging 303. for work that he had only paid ,12s. for getting done/— A. Abraham, one of the defendants, stated that it was at the special request of the plaintiff that they left the shop, and the fresh expense they would incur by going into a new shop was to be considered an equivalent to replacing the fixtures in the old one. They would not have left had defendant not agreed to tear up the old agreement. They were doing well in the old shop. — T. Btis3el, the other defendant, gave corroborative evidence. — A nonsuit was recorded. Jones and Co. v. Perrier and HutchINSON. — Claim. 17J. 17s. 6d. ( for work done. Mr. Wynn for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Sheehan for the defendants.— Mr. Sheehan stated that this case would result in across action. The agreement between plaintiffs and defendants was in respect to the printing of the Tomahawk. The plaintiffs were bound to print it for a ct-rtain time before payment was made, which they did not do, and thus the defendants were put to a great loss. He asked that the case stand adjourned until the next Court-day, to allow the case of the defendant against the plaintiffs to be heard at the same time. — After a long argument between the counsel, it^ was agreed that the case stand adjourned until next Court-day, provided the defendant found satisfactory security during the day, failing which judgment would be confessed. .North Island Goldmining Company v. C. Button.— Claim, 51., calls due. Mr. Sheehan for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Wynn for the defendant. — H. H. Lusk, liquidator to the company, proved that defendant was a shareholder in the company ; that the defendant had a copy of a letter (read) forwarded to his address in hortknd-stresfc, intimating that the present liquidator's call was made, and was then due. — The defendant, being sworn, admitted being a shareholder, that he was awara of such a call having been made, and that he had consulted a fellow-shareholder about it, and asked what he w as going to do— whether to pay or resist payment. — Counsel was heard at great length on both sides, after which his Worship deferred giving judgment t until next Court-day.