RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume III, Issue 787, 13 November 1865, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

THIS DAT. (Before the Hon. A. C. Strode, 11. M.) DRUNKENNESS. David Nesbitt and Thomas Hill, each charged with this offence, were fined 20s and costs, or the usual alternative. William Jackson alias Townsend was for the same offence fined £5, or 14 days imprisonment. David Jones and Peter Harton having been locked up since Sunday morning, were discharged. CIVIL, CASES. John "Lazar, town clerk, v. John Balaam, claim of 10s for rates. The claim was admitted, but defendant pleaded inability to pay the amount, owing to his having paid away all his money for his wife’s burial. Under these circumstances, the plaintiff withdrew the case. Same v. Hugh Haswell, claim of 12s for rates. Liability was admitted, and judgment given for the amount claimed and costs. Same v. James Finlay, claim of £6 10s for rates. Mr Hawkins (from Mr Ward’s office) appeared for the defendant. One of the items —la claim for rates of part section 11, block 12, assessed at £5, was disputed, inasmuch as the defendant was never connected in any way with the property on which the rate sued for was levied. The case was then withdrawal. Same v. David Warnock, claim of £4 7s fid for rates. Defendant pleaded not indebted on two grounds, firstly, non-owaiership, secondly, never having been served with notice. It appeared that the notice had been served on parties named respectively Fitzsimmons and Burke, but not on defendant. Plaintiff non-suited. Arkle and Thomson v. Alexander, claim of £5 3s lid for goods supplied. It appeared that the goods had been bought by a Mrs Jones, and for payment of which the defendant had become responsible. The Magistrate said that such a promise was worthless, and dismissed the case. Jane Barnwell v. Robert Wilson, claim of £l2 for detention of a stove. The facts of the case have been heard before, when Messrs. Hart and Davie as defendants were summoned for its detention, and it transpired that the stove was in the present defendant’s possession ; hence this action. Judgment was given for the amount claimed, and costs to be reduced to is upon restitution of the stove.

In the case of Cann v. Falkner, which had been adjourned for the Magistrate to consider the objections raised by the defendant’s counsel, his worship held that the drunken man was the primary cause of the breakage of the glass, and was therefore liable. Plaintiff non-suited.

There were a number of other cases heard, but they were of a trivial nature.