MAGISTRATES COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVII, Issue 17286, 29 September 1916, Page 8

MAGISTRATES COURT.

CHRISTOHURCH. Mr H. W. Bishop, S.M., presided ai> the Magistrate’s Court yesterday. John Crawford, charged with drunkenness and breach of a prohibtion order, was admonished and discharged.

Brown Bros. (Mr Daero) -claimed £lO from S. J. Gallagher (Mr Kirk), as money alleged to have been lent.. Alfred Brown gave evidence that in November last the firm lent Gallagher and his brother £lO, to be debited against royalties to. be secured from the defendant’s invention, the Universal fire alarm. Plaintiffs took possession of tbo alarm for some time, but owing to an unfavourable report Gallagher took back the alarm to improve, agreeing to repay the £lO. .Witness wrote five, times and received no reply. No royalties had been seeurod, as tho invention was not developed. To Mr Kirk : The defendant’s brother got tho £lO. His firm woro to make the installations. Tho brother had gone away in tho Sixteenth Reinforcements. T'. TI. W. Brown, another of the plaintiffs;'said'that the amount was advanced on royalties to; bo paid out of instillations. The defence was that tli'c plaintiffs and the defendant and his brother wero in a joint agreement to produce tho patent, but it fell through. No claim had been made until tho brother left for’ the front. S. J. Gallagher, the defendant, said that ho and his brother invented a fi.ro alarm and approached Brown Bros., who wero very anxious, to becomo solo agents. Ilis brother worked the model up in Brown’s wor-kshop, and the plain-' tiffs, after pressing them to secure;full patent rights, advanced £lO, to be socured oiit of • royalties on installations, for which Brown Bros, were to have the sole agency. Tho invention was non-compensating and Brown Bros, sent it back, but the excuse they gave' was that their firm would be likely to bo broken up by the Conscription Act. His brother enlisted in the Fifteenth -Reinforcements, and the first notice he got .of a claim was through a debt collecting agency. .To Mr Dacre : He understood that the invention was valueless. Tho Magistrate said that on the receipt. given .by the defendant he must . find him liable. Judgment was given for £lO and coats. Judgment by default with costs, was given for the plaintiffs in tne following cases:—J. S. Yeoman v. B. T. Missen, £2 8s 9d; E. Hewish v. G. Olarke, £3 17s 6d; F. D. Kesteven v. C. Bagnalh £3O; W. A. Sheldon v. Froderick Wilson. £23: Cassidy and 00. v. Thomas Mayo, £ls 2s; \V. .H. Banks v. U. 'Hannibal. £9s 7s od: Graham, Wilson and Smellie, v. Mrs Ashley, £2 12s 2d; Adams, Ltd; v.' A. Carrmtell, £2 10s;, Butterworth Bros v. Gr. C. Smith, £.5 10s Sd.