RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Lyttelton Times, Volume XXIII, Issue 1401, 18 May 1865, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

CHRISTCHURCH.— Tuesday, May 16. ("Before C. C. Bowen, Esq., R.M., and 0. H. Brown, Esq., J.P.) Drunk and Disorderly.—Robert Barrett was charged with this offence, and was fined £1, or, in default, to be locked up for 48 hours. The following debt-cases were disposed of:—Rieknian, Brothers v. Cox—£3 17s 6d; judgment for £3 ss, and costs. Rickman v. Baisfield—£lo; judgment for £8. and costs. Ballard v. Symington—£7 7s ; plaintiff nonsuited. Judgment for the full atnount claimed, and costs, was uiven for the plaintiffs in the following cases:—Wilson v. Millington, £13 Gs ; Neighbours v. Bush, £7 7s; Baker v. Miller, £1 17s 6d: Silvester v Cameron, £11 9s; Atwood v. Hawkins £5 8s Sd; Duncan v. Gilbert, £12 16s; Kickman, Brothers, v. Lee. £2 12s6d ; Same v. Wrighton, £1; Same v. Cox, £1 ss; Same v. Prior, £3 2s 6d; Same v. Everett, £1 17s 6d; Same v. Kerr, £1 ss ; Same v. Hampton, £2 IDs; Same v. Wallis, £3 2s 6d; Same v. Crysell, £13 10s; Same v. Newton, £6 158 fid; Same v. Beechy, £2 lf>s; Langdown and Co. V. Chambers, £2 r>s ; Minchin v. Rhodes, £3 9s ; Same v. Same, £5 6s; Same v. Same, £4 3s; Nichol--8011 V. Bishop, £3 17s Id; Reed v. Newton, £24 3s. Wednesday, May 17. (Before C. C. Bowen, Esq., R.M.) Dbunkknnksh. —George Reynolds and C, Muir were dismissed, with a caution. The following debt cases were determined: — Stringer and Co. v. Collins, £75 8s 9d; May and Co. £25 15s; Aiknmn and Co. v. Cunningham £27 Is (id; and Martin v. Cooke, £48 lis— judgment for plaintiff in each case, with costs. In the case of Ruding v. Goodwin, debt. £69 6s. judgment was given for £22 6s; and in the case of Nelson v, the Superintendent, judgment was given for defendant.

LYTTELTON.— Tuesday, May 16. (Before Win. Donald, Esq., R.M.) Collier and Co. v. Stout—Claim for £4 18s 9d. This case was heard on the week previous, and the Resident Magistrate took time to consider his verdict. He gave judgment to plaintiffs for £4 18s 9d, without Williams v. M'Quf.bn —Claim for £24. This was a re-hearing of a case disposed of on the previous Tuesday, when a verdict was recorded fur defendant, with leave to apply for a new trial, if iilaintiff could produce further evidence. Another witness, nfined John Corbett, came forward, but his evidence did not in any way alter the previous decision, and plaintiff had to pay additional expenses of re-hearing, witnesses, &c., amounting to £2 Ms. Tayler v. Young—Claim for £16 2?, for goods supplied. Defendant did not appear. Judgment for plaintiff for full ainount, and £2 2s costs. Liahiutt op Carriers—Davis v. Gillan — Claim for i:7 10s,, for goods short delivered. Mr. Priest, solicitor, appeared on behalf of the plaintiff. Mr. Davis, on being sworn, stated that on or_»bout Friday, March to, be sold Mr Haphael, of Christchurch, a case of moleskin trout>ern. The clerk ami Btoreman delivered the same to Mr. Gillan, the defendant, who is a carrier. The case contained i« uairs Was afterwards informed that only 100 pans were' delivered. James Tucker, storeman to Mr. Davis, was then sworn: lie stated that he delivered a case to Mr. Gillan. containing 125 pairs of molehill trousers. lie counted out 68 pairs, and Mr. Tucker 57 pairs. They were counted twice. He number was entered in the receipt book, and defendant signed it. (The counterfoil of receipt was l produced.) The ease was well fastened up

nails. Hy Court: Witness stated that lie assisted defendant to put tho ease into the cart, and saw it leavo tho store. Could not make any mistake in tho count,—there were 125 pairs. Hy defendant; You did not nee I hem counted, lilchd. Hunker, clerk to Mr. Davis, corroborated tho storeman's evidence about tho number of pairs ; but did not sco defendant sign tho delivery-book. ,lames M'Kenzie, shopman to Mr. Raphael, proved receiving a cure of goods from defendant on 1 In; 11th March, at their sixty in Christchurch. Before any one had acces.s to the cane, he counted out HK) pairs of trousern. Tho case was nailed down, hut it had been opened ; the zinc was cut. Did not receive any invoice with the goods. The east! was delivered about tho middle of the day. Hy defendant: You asked who wns to pay you for the cartage? I referred you to Mr. Raphael. It was not early in the day when you delivered the case. Mr. A. Isaac Raphael said he entered into an arrangement with Mr. Davis for a case of trousers, without reference whatever to number, llis order to the shopman was to count, them when they came. It was his duty to do so,and make an entry of it in the stock-book. On inquiry, found that 100 pairs had been received. Communicated with Mr. Davis almost immediately. Defendant was told by his assistant that no cart note had been left—that is, no delivery order was left; it, is usual to do so with the merchants here, and to sign for them—receipts aro taken and cart-notes filed. Hy defendant: The carriage was paid some time after returning from Dunedin. James (iillan, defendant, sworn: He stated that ho got the case from Mr. Davis' store, in Lyttelton, to deliver to Mr. Raphael, Christchurch. Did not notice the number of pairs of trousers, or quantity marked on the note when he signed it. Delivered the case the same as he got it. Mr. Raphael paid 7s fid for the cartage, after ho came back. A month after that Mr. Davis told him there were 25 pairs short. Nothing could have been taken out of the case. It was on an iron tank in the dray, and opposite his window all night. Took the case from the store about five in the evening ; was four hours and a-half in going to Christchurch ; did not unload anywhere, nor take off the tank ; and it was kept in his own yard all night; did not know what was in the case. James j M'lntyre, a carter, was called by defendant, but his evidence was immaterial. Mr. Priest, on behalf of the plaintiff, urged the liability of the carter. Mr. M'Kenscie was recalled. lie stated that he opened the case and counted out the trousers immediately, and made the entry in the stock book soon after. Judgment for plaintiff for £7 10*, and 29s costs. Si'anger v. Snoswull.—Claim for £2, cash lent. Judgment for full amount, and 7s cost. Samk v. Jas. Davidson.—Claim for £4, cash due for changing an advance note. Judgment for plaintiff, and 78. costs. Hill v. Ansley.—Claim for £14 Is 2d, for supplying stone from Charteris Bay quarry. Judgment for plaintiff for £12 ss, and costs 15s.