RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 1979, 8 September 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

This i'ay. (Before A,C. Strode, Esq., R.M.) DRUNK AND DISORDERLY, A, Fraser, for disorderly conduct ; Riclid. Yoiaey, Mary Thompson, and H. M'C'ulloch, for being drunk and disorderly, were each fined 10s, or 24 hours’ imprisonment. Civil Cares. Geo. Little v. E, Wilson.—A claim for LI 7s, for IS sacks not returned. The sacks were sent with a quantity of potatoes botwe n to and three ye tis ago, and had not been returned. Mr Wilson said the sack'-' had never been calh-d f-r, or the pi d'diff miclit have bad tlrm; and no entry of them could be found in his bo >ks that they were owing to him. He could have them if he chose. —The Magistrate thought the sacks ought to have been sent back, as the hja l gain was, to be charged Is 61 each or returned The plaintiff explained that the custom was for the seller to call for sacks. \ erdict for the plaintiff, 1.1 7s, with costs. Same v. 11. Murray.—'l he plaintiff claimed LI 11s, balance of account for flour sold and eggs supplied. The plaintiff said the defendant had purchased a ton of flour which, at the end of three months he paid for, and deducted 2$ per cent. ; to this he objected, and also claimed a guinea for seven doz. eggs. The defendant admitted purchasing the flour, but said the money was paid shortly after delivery, which had been delayed owing to the delivery order having been lost. It was customary with him to pay for eggs when received, and therefore he coul 1 not suppose they had not b en paid for.—The Magistrate considered the discount should be a lowed, as the loss of the ord r was a pure accident, and the defendant derived no benefit from the flour until 16 days before payment. Judgment for the plaintiff, LI Is with costs Same v. Eleanor Collins.—A claim for 19s 6d. for goods supplied. The defendant said that the plaintiff had been offered a pound note, which he refused to take, stating that ho p'efcrred summoning her. —His Worship pointed out that evidence to that effect should have been given, when the plaintiff Would have been saddled with costs. Verdict for the plaintiff for the amount with costs.

Finister v. Stevens. —A chum for the value of a saddle sent to the defendant for sale, w ich the plaintiff’ could not get back from him, nor for which could he obtain tinmoney. The defendant did md appear, and judgment was given in favor of the plaintiff by default for the amount. Marshall and Bev ridge v. Kirk —L9 17s 4d, for groceries supplied. There bein'no defence, judgment was given by default for the amount.

Alex. Mnirv. Scot!.—The pi'intiff sought to recover the sum of L2 10s, for two weeks’ board. The defendant did n 4 appear, and jud ment was given for the amount by deault. C.'otfle v. Bethune —Mr Wilson 'or the defendant. The p'aintiff claimed L2 9s ; two pounds for damage done by 40 sheep on ground the property of the plaintiff, and 9s for loss of time in ddving them off. The sheep were said to have eaten oats and ryegrass down, the value of which he estimated at L2. Evidence was brought to shew the number of sheep in the paddock, and the extent of damage done. Mr Wilson contended that the number of sheep and damage done were over-estimate <, and that the plaintiff himself was to blame through keeping a dog th ;t disturbed the sheep. His Worship said the defendant was bound to take care that his sheep did not do damage to his neighbor’s property. He did not think the damages claimed excessive, but the 9s for loss of time was inadmissable. Verdict for the plaintiff, L2 and coats.