RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2727, 13 November 1871, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

This Day. ! (Before A. 0, Strode, Esq., R.M.) Civil Cases. | Russell v. Walker.—Ll4 18s 6d, a claim [ for goods supplied. The debt was admitted, and it was arranged to be paid at the rate of two pounds a month until some work was 5 finished by defendant when the balance * would be paid. i Robertson v. Payne. —L 5 10s, a claim for ; balance for an IOU. Mr Stout for the de- . feudant. There was a cross action in this ■ case to recover L2O for misrepresentation of i the quantity of milk yielded by certain cows t leased by the plaintiff to the defendant. The last case was taken first. From the e evidence of Payne it appeared that Robertj son having nine cows to let, Payne was in- - duoed to take them on certain terms, on it b being stated that they would yield sixty - quarts of milk, instead of which they only gave forty-five quarts. He had to purchase milk from other persona to keep the ’ connection together. He lost in conB sequence, eight weeks’ labor which 1 he estimated at two pounds a week, and three pounds of actual money. A witr ness named Anderson confirmed Payne’s k evidence. Robertson was put into tbe box, " and denied the allegation of Payne that the * yield of milk was mentioned. Margaret f Robertson was called, who said a cow that was I complained of as being dry gave seven or eight ' quarts of milk for three months after Payne ' gave up the cows. His Worship considered 3 the weight of evidence was in favor of 1 Payne. Judgment, L 5 for damages, with ’ costs. In the other case, judgment was B given by consent for the plaintiff. * M'Meckan v. ‘Smyth.— LlO. Mr Stout for the plaintiff; Mr Anderson for the defc fence. This wag a claim for damage alleged j to have been done by a sucgession of trespasses upon the plaintiff’s ground by the defendant in the construction of the Clutha ' Railway. The plaintiff is lessee of x land at Caversham, which was fenced. when he took the land, but tbe fences had been re- ’ moved by order of defendant. Inconsequence he was put to great expense and inconvenij ence in looking after his cattle. He had g been obliged to go after his cattle twentyy two times since July, and he estimated his | loss of time at 8s to 10s each journey. T. 8 Calcutt said as Government Agent he gave Mr Smyth pos-ession of the land for railway purposes. He purchased the land of the j proprietor, and gave full compensation both to Mr Sidey, the owner, and M'Meckan. A much better fence was put up than before, a and he considered every claim was included , in the amount of compensation paid. The * defendant said that five chains of the fence a were removed for the purpose of making a railway and road, and the fence put up was e much better than the original one. There - never was any opening left in the fence, and he believed it was kept in order. Leave was i- given to the men ac work to cross the land ; on paying sixpence each per month The d other part of the fence was not cattle s proof. D. Mackenzie knew the fence ain question, and had sen cattle going through a different part of the fence from that complained of. He had never seen any of McMeckan’s cattle go through where complained of. The fence might have been down a day or a night. T. Calcutt re-called : He should say the fence was never down for ten days. On one occasion he called the attention of the Smyth’s foreman to a batten being down, but the fence was one of the worst in the country, nnd could not bo called a proper (fence. His Worship said there [j might have been some little damage, but, in r a great work like the Clutha Railway, men e must submit to some inconvence. He B thought the case would be met by a payment c of twenty shillings. Judgment accordingly.