THE COURTS-TODAY

Evening Star, Issue 16550, 9 October 1917, Page 5

THE COURTS-TODAY

MAGISTRATE'S COURT. (Before H. A. Young, Esq., S.M.) Judgment by default in the following cases:—Archibald Miller v. Frederick Graham, of Timaru, £2 19s 2d, for groceries ; Norman W. M'Lean (Mr Moore) v. Ted Priston, 15s, on an account stated; Otago Finance and Agency Company (Mr Irwm) v. James W. "Robertson, of Port Chalmers, £29 10s, money advanced, and interest; D.I.C. (Mr Moore) v. J. Parker, of Palmorston, £lO 12s 7d, on an account stated; Wright, Stephenson, and Co. (Mr F. S. Brent) v. Robert Apes, of Puketernki, £2 17s 4d, balance of an account; Goorge Guyton (Mr Duncan) v. Joseph Potter, of Port Chalmers, 103, for milk; Neill and Co. v. John M'Dowall, of Roxburgh, £35 2s 4d, for goods supplied ; G. T. K. M'Konzio '(Mr Duncan) v. Frank Popham, of Orepuki, 10s, for tea. Louis Solomon (Mr Hanlon) v. Emma Harriet Wright (Mr Irwin). —Claim for tho return of a bed and bedding, valued at £5 15s 6d. There was a counter-claim of £4 10s for two weeks 1 board of plaintiff and his wife.—Louis Solomon, storeman, said I his mother-in-law was a widow. Her daughter, witness's wife, died in childbirth. Witness and Ids wife lived at defendant's place for a fortnight. They bought the bed at that time and took it to defendant's place, and tho bedding was taken there from witness's house at St. Clair, and these things were left there when Mrs Solomon went to the private hospital where she died. As to the counterclaim, -witness gavo his\ wife £2 15s each week to pay for tho hoard, and she said before she died that she paid it.—Mr Irwin asked -witness what his wife told him she had paid for the counterpane and other things, and he refused to answer, merely stating that ho gavo her £lO to buy tho articles.—Defendant in the course of her evidence, said that Mrs Solomon had been at work before marrying, and bought tho bed with her own money. The blankets and the pillows were bought with Solomon's money, but at lower prices than those claimed. The counterpane was a present from a friend, and witness gave ner the quilt, whilst one of Mrs Solomon's companions presented her with the sheets. As to the counter-claim, it was for a week's board for Solomon before the marriage, for two weeks for Mrs Solomon after her marriage, and thon another wwk for the husband after his wifo went to the hospital.—ln cross-examination by Mr Hanlon, Mrs Wright admitted that she wanted to show up Solomon in a court of justice. His Worship said that he could only give judgment in equity and good conscience. It would be for Airs Wright on the claim and for Solomon on the counterclaim, each party paying costs.