MAGISTERIAL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 8819, 14 June 1889, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH. Thursday, June 13. (Before R. Hill Fisher and E, Dobson, Esqa.) Shop-listing. —Henry Hogwood, for attempting to steal a cheese from the shop door of E. W. Marriott, was sentenced to two months’ imprisonment.—Thomas W. "White, charged with stealing a pair of ducks, value sa, from the shop of R. H. Gainsford, was remanded till the following day. (Before R. Beetham, Esq., R.M., and R. Westenra, Esq.) Civil Cages.—P. and D. Duncan v.W. Dillamore, claim 19s 6d; judgment for plaintiff by default.—S. Cohen v. W. Bowden, claim £3 10s 5 judgment for amount of claim, less 10s paid into Court. —J. Ferguson v. E. Lee, claim £6O Is ; judgment for plaintiff by default. —H. A. Davis v. C. J. M'Cormack, claim £5 10s. Mr Slater for plaintiff; Mr Nalder for defendant. The claim was for liability under a joint guarantee for £lO, signed by defendant and one O’Connor, for £lO advanced by plaintiff to W.Hea vey. The money was advanced on Feb. 2, and on March 2 Heavey failed to meet the first monthly payment of £2. Plaintiff did not then inform defendant of the borrower’s failure to keep to the agreement, but gave the latter another month’s grace. No money being then forthcoming from the borrower, plaintiff called on the guarantors, and O'Connor met bis liability by making an arrangement to pay his share. Defendant in his evidence swore that the amount and names were not filled in in the guarantee when he signed it, and that Heavey came to him and said, “ Have you got £2 on you t" Winess replied that he had not. Heavey afterwards came to him, and asked if he would sign a guarantee, which he (defendant) supposed was for £2. Witness signed it, and it was then in blank. Ho did not know that Heavey only received £6 10s out of the .£10; or that £2 10a was deducted for an old account due to Da. is. and £1 for interest. Mr Nalder submitted that no notice having beer* given on the first default, and the guarantee not being filled up when signed, should prove fatal to plaintiff’s case. Ho quoted Davis v. Cooper. Law Journal Ex. Div.. 1843 ; De Coiier on Guarantee, 30’; Roscoe on Law of Evidence, Nisi Frius. in support of itta contention. Mr Slater said there was implied authority to Davis ..0 fill in the amount, and quoted Wright v. Simpson, 16, Veaoy, 734, to support his case. Judgment for defendant.