THE COURTS.—TO-DAY.

Evening Star, Issue 7237, 13 June 1887, Page 2

THE COURTS.—TO-DAY.

SUPREME COURT.-CIVIL SITTINGS.

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Williams and a Jury of Four.) William Hasxie t. John Milne.— Claim, Ll2O, balance of money due upon the sale of two stacks of oaten sheaves and one stack of straw. Mr D. D. Macdonald appeared for the Slaintiff, and Mr J. E. Denniston for the efendant. The plaintiff, in his statement of claim, declared that on June 18, 1886, he sold defendant two stacks of oaten sheaves and one stack of straw for L 230. Defendant had taken delivery of the stacks, and had paid LllO on account. Plaintiff now asked for judgment for the balance. The defendant’s statement of defence set forth that the agreement to sell, the stacks was as follows:—“I have this day sold to John Milne two stacks of oaten sheaves and one of wheat straw, for the sum of L 230. Guaranteed ninety tons of sheaves.” The stack of straw was of no value, and was included in the price to be paid for the oaten sheaves. The three stacks contained only sixty-one and a-half tons of sheaves, instead of ninety tons, as agreed, and their value was L 157 6s 9d. Defendant had paid LI 10, and on September 29 the balance (L 47 6s 9d) had been tendered to plaintiff and refused by him, and was now paid into Court. The following witnesses were examined for the plaintiff: William Hastie, Robert Wilkie, Joseph Hind, Alexander Sntherland, William Sawyers, and Thomas Reid. Isabella Milne, William Stewart, Charles Alexander Fraser, John Milne, and John Fleming were called for the defence. His Honor, in the course of his summing up, said that what the jury had to consider was whether the document signed by Hastie contained the words “guaranteed ninety tons of sheaves.” If it did not, the plaintiff was entitled to recover; if it did, there was a guarantee on the part of the plaintiff, and they would have to say whether the sheaves were delivered or not. It appeared from the evidence that it took ten hours liquoring and bargaining for the plaintiff and defendant to arrive at a contract which thfey could deem satisfactory. The jury, after a short retirement, found a verdict for the plaintiff, and judgment was given for Ll2O (including the amount paid into Court), with costs on the lowest scale, disbursements, and witnesses' expenses. Charles Farley v. Elizabeth Tyeell and Charles Reid.—Suit for the administration of the real and personal estate of Henry Parley (deceased). Mr F. Chapman appeared for the plaintiff and Mr G. Cook for the defendant. [Left sitting]. CITY POLICE COURT. (Before General Fulton, J.P.) Drunkenness.— James While, John Wan, and Michael O'Brien alias John Walsh were each fined ss, in default twenty-four hours’ imprisonment. James Poland and John Wilson, who both appeared in Court drunk, were remanded until to - morrow, and ordered to have another charge entered against their names. Larrikinism.— John Whitton and George Westfold admitted having removed a number of gates from their hinges along the Sandymount road on the sth inst., bat denied having placed them on ahe road so as to. obstruct or endanger the traffic.—General Fulton cautioned the defendants against such conduct, and fined them 10s and costs.