RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Grey River Argus, Volume XII, Issue 1113, 21 February 1872, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

ahaura. Thursday, February 15. ;■' ' (Before C.vWhitefoord, Esq., R.M.) CIVIL CASES. , James Hayes v.' Fanny Venables.— A claim of L 2 Is 3d. for drapery goods supplied at Half-Ounce. This case was previously before the Court, when a document purporting to be a receipt in full was produced on the part of the defen^ dant. The plaintiff denied the signature, and a verdict was given for the plaintiff with •:. costs'. '; jAT re-hearing was subse-' quently granted^ to enable the defendant to produce evidence that the receipt was genuine. The defendant said she went to the plaintiff's store at Half-Ounce alpng with one. Olive Branch, or Brandt, a" miner, and the plaintiff's stbrernan took her frjend's security for the amount of the debt. .Brandt afterwards brought her the receipt, and she was certain he must ,have' settled the account, or the plaintiff would not have allowed her to leave Half-Ounce. John Hayes said it was correct that the defendant brought a young man to his store, but that he refused to take his guarantee for the debt unless he paid it there and then. Brandt not being forthcoming, a verdict was again .;given for the plaintiff with costs and professional cost 3. Mr Guinness for defendant. : . Erickson y. Taylor.— A claim for the price of a pair of elastic-side boots. This case was in the nature of a breach of contract. The plaintiff agreed to make the defendant a pair of boots, and the defendant in return was to take six photographs of the plaintiff and. his brother. The boots were made and delivered, , but " the ' heavens .were not propitious .for pprtraitrtaking^ ■_ The defendant said : he never since Had got an opportunity of taking thelikeness of the plaintiff, which he was always willing to do, and he put in the following notice to show that he was always ready :— "Granville, Feb. 3, 1872— 1n the niat'er of agreement between George Erickson and John J. Taylor, whereby, the said George Erickson agreed, in consideration of six photographs to be taken eacli of himself and brother, to make the said John J. Tayjor one pair of elastic-side boots. Take notice that I hereby again notify that 1 am prepared to execute'my part of the said contract. .. (Signed) John J. Taylor, Geo. Ericksok." The Magistrate said that the defendant must pay for the boots, but matters had now come to such a pitch between the, parties that a flattering picture of the plaintiff would not be likely to result from any artfetic effort of the' defendant. A verdict was given for the plaintiff with costs. ■ , J Jas. Cunningham (in the estate of Jas. Magoffin) v. J. M'Grath.—Fhis was an action involving two claims for goods sold and deliveredj amounting in the aggregate toL3Bls3d. An agreement was made between James Magoffin, at that time a storekeeper at Half-Ounce, and who had since assigned his estate to his creditors, and the defendant, tbat< the latter should work and represent a; share for him in his claim at Duffer Creek. The agreement was loosely ;drawn up, and.it > was one of those documents, the contents of which might mean anything. Its general terms were that the defendant was to receive half the proceeds of the share, ; with L 2 5s per week in cash and goods. There was another arrangement to' be made in . case the claim paid not more than L 6 per week on an' averaged It was agreed thaj; Magoffin's liability should.^ cease' on his giving notice to the defendant that he abandoned his interest in the claim. >A notice to this effect was served by Magoffin on the defendant on the,l7th, May, 1871, and a verdict was given for the plaintiff for the price of the goods obtained by the defendant from that date, amounting to L 29 8s Id with costs. Mr Guinness for the plaintiff, Mr Staite for defendant.. •■■••■ J. Hayes v. J. M. Ollivier.— A claim of L 2.183 6d, for gbods'supplied at HalfOunce to the late firm of , Tarry and Ollivier. The defence was that the plaintiff 's brother and agent had entered into a verbal agreement to take 10s in the pound: in settlement of the claim of his principal, .and that he had taken the amount out in board. This agreement was, denied for the plaintiff, and it-was contended that even if it did exist it was no bar to the plaintiff's action.. The Magistrate said he had no doubt the agreement was made; but,, xinder the circumstances, it was net binding oh the .plaintiff.' Judgment would be ! for the plaintiff for the amount claimed, to be paid within three, months, but without : costs. .:..-• ;;. ; . ,■.'/•., : ■.-• \ '■■ , .. ■■'.;,• v- ■' James 'Byrne v. Frank Grogan.— A claim sf Ll2 Is 3d, for goods supplied at Duffer Creek in 1868. The plaintiff sued as administrator of the estate of the late Mr John' Byrne,' his brother. : The defence was that the goods were supplied to the defendant and his partners, who were at the time wprking at old Half-Ounce. The co-adventurers dissolved partnership, and Grogan and another left the company. Those who remained in the claim' agreed to pay all the liabilities of the partnership,! and the creditors agreed to take them for their several amounts. It was stated by: the defendant Mr Byrne agreed among! the rest. Notice of the dissolution of partnership irid the terms of it were published; in ; the Grey River Argus on the 14th February, 1869, a copyof the docu-i merit was filed in the Warden's Office/ and it was, now produced. - It was also stated that other parties were sued for: this debt. Judgment , was giyea for the' defendant with costs. ■. . Johnson v. Stephens , a claim for LlOO,j for wages as a packer, and Same v. Same,: for LlO, for wrongful detention of a watch,! were adjourned for one week. Mont-i gomery v. Lardi, and Hamilton y, Card; were also adjourned. • \ '' ; i The Oourt was adjburned to Feb. £2.