Magistrate's Court, Queenstown.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 1520, 19 February 1886, Page 5

Magistrate's Court, Queenstown.

Monday, Bth February, 1886.

(Before H. S. Hickson, Esq., R.M.}

J. M'Dougall v. F. Langham.—Gain for £3l l?s. I Mr Turton, tor plaintiff. Mr Smith, for defendaut, pleaded indebted. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs, £1 12s. R. C. Hunter v. J. B. Kerr.—Claim for £9lßs 7d balance of account, the particulars of which were for obtaining from October to December, 1885, 198411)8 of trout at 6d per lb (£49 12s), one-third share, £l6 10e Id ; one-fourth share of 901b ditto, lis 3*l; and nine days' wages at 8s per day, £3 12s; total £2O 13s lid, less coutra account and cash lent £lO 15s 4d. Mr Smith, for plaintiff. Mr Turton, for defendant, pleaded not indebted. R. C. Hunter, a fisherman, settled at tho Bluff, deposed that at the request of defendant he came up to Kingston iu September last to fish for trout. (Letters produced.) Defendant undertook to sell all fish caught, and witness was to get one-third of the sale of them, which was fixed at 6d per lb. Defendant was to supply boats and nets. They (witness and another man, with him) caught 20741bs of trout, which, after certain deductions, left 19S9lbs to be divided amongst defendant and themselves; there were besides 901bs for which witness claimed one fourth. He also claimed a week's wages whilst waiting till the tackle was ready, and three days' wages for bringing boat from Wye Creek to Kingston at defendant s request. W. Thomas was workiug with him under a similar engagement. Cross-examined—They had an accident once through the Mountaineer steamer, and it cost £1 16a to repair the boat. They also had to hire another boat in consequence. He was not aware that £25 2s 6d was still owing to defendant for fish sold. Never gave any fish away to parties on the Mountaineer to help the business. W. Thomas, fishmonger, Kingston, deposed that he was mates with the last witness and defendant. They agreed with defendant tj fish for one-third each—defendant to sell all fish and supply boats, nets, and other tackle required for fishing. Cross-examined—lt was a distinct aqreement that defendant was to pay nil expenses in connection with carrying on fulling operations—witness and Hunter to deliver the fish anil to get one-third each for same at ths rate of 6d per lb. Was not present when plaintiff made the agreement with defeudant, but the latter said plaintiff was comiug up the following day; but both agreements were alike. For the defence,

J. B. Kerr deposed that the agreement between himself and plaintiff, was according to letter produced, but the cost of all material was to be deducted before sharing the proceeds. The plaut co»t £73 odd. When the present demand was made there were £42 of outstanding accounts. The profits and losses were to be equal thirds. Some of the fish were giveu to the captains of steamers for towing l»oat. The accounts showed plaintiff was indebted to him £9 14s 3d for share of expenses. The cost of repairing damaged boat was £6. Cross-examined—Could uot say whether account (produced) from W. A. Boyd for repairing boat, £1 lis, was correct.

W. Burt, fisherman, Tairoa Head, Port Chalmers, deposed that w hen himself and mate had a tow by a steamer, they had to give a fish. He had been fishing for a fourth share ; the fisherman had to look after the Iwats and keep the gear iu order, and to male good to the owner if the l>oat was loht. If he had made an agreement similar to the present one. should consider all expenses of railage, etc., would be divided equally between shareholders. His Worship, in giving judgment, said that, taking all the evidence iuto consideration, he thought plaintitT was entitled to judgment. (The Magistrate read letter of 29th September, to plaintiff, in which defendant said of the proceeds " one-third is to L' n to yourself, one-third is to go to your mate, and the other third to go to jour humble servant.") Judgment would be given for amount originally handed iu, namely, £o lis Td, with costs, £3 itis. W. Thomas v. J. B. Kerr.—Claim for £9 15s Id, made up as follows:—One-third share of 29441bs of fish at Gd per lb , £l4 15s Bd. Mr Smith, for plaintiff. Mr Turton, for defendant, pleaded not indebted.

\V. Thomas, fisherman, deposed to correctness of amout claimed.

Cross-examined—Young Kerr often neglected to take a copy of weights of fish delivered. Defendant often cot Sd per lb for the tish. For the defence,

J. Kerr, sou of defendant, deposed to the weights produced by himself being correct, as he put them down every time. W. Thomas, on re-examination, produced a list of weights taken by him. The Magistrate said defendant would have to jret the benefit of r.:iv difference in weight, and gave judgment for £6 16s, with costs, £3 16s. W. Cuanmings v. W. Scoles.—Claim for £24, for eight head of store cattle. Mr Turton, for plaintiff. Defendant, in person, pleaded not indebted. W. Cumming, settler at the lJrancht-s, Upper Shetover, deposed to one J. Smith coming to him in Novemlter last, with a view to purchasing cattle for defendant, when witness agreed to sell eight head for £3 per head. He afterwards got a letter from Smith (dated November 3) agreeing to take the cattle on behalf of defendant, to whose farm hs drove the cattle, and gave delivery on the 9th Dic-.'inW, Defendant met him and opened the gite of his paddock and took them in. Defendant did not seem satisfied, and thought the cattle ought to have been bigger. Defendant agreed to pay the money luto witness' account at the Hank of New Zealand, Arrow, on the 15th January last. Witness afterwards received a letter from defendant, dated 11 th Decernlxjr, stating that two of the cattle had died, and another was Hick, and witness had better go down and look after them. The cattle had come off poor country, and being put in a good clover paddock by defendant, it was the opinion of witness that they got blown—the night being wet. Defendant only promised to pay for the five cattle which lived.

Cross-examined—Was about three and a-half days driviug the cattle dowu. The bullocks were three and four years old. Witne»s made some remark about the cattle not living, but he did not •ay he would not take delivery of them. Did not overdrive the cattle. J. Smith, farmer, Millers Flat, corroborated the evidence of previous witness. J. Scott, farmer, Millers Flat, deposed to seeing plaintiff with the cattle in dispute, on the 9th December last, aud made the remark that they were wonderfully fresh, considering the rough place they had come from. Cross-examined—The cattle looked better even than some living on the flat lands. K. Mowsoa, butcher, Quecnstown, deposed to having seeu plaintiff going along the Flat, and defeudant behind, driving the cattle in dispute to the latter'* farm. The cattle seemed in very fair condition for store cuttle. For the defence, Thomas Brown, rabbiter, Millers Flat, saw the cattle brought down. One of them died the day it was brought dowu. the next morning another died, and on the following morning another. The cattle did not eat much, but seemed to be tired and were lying down mostly. Crossexaunued—Was not much of & judge of cattle.

\V. Scoles, farmer, Millers Flat, deposed to having authorised Smith to buy the bullocks which were to be three and four years old. These in dispute were not aa represented, and he declined to tike delivery, but as plaintiff did not know where to put them, witness allowed him to put them in a paddock, and said that he (plaintiff) could sec how they got on ; but witness declined to be responsible. Plaintiff put them in the paddock. (His Worship here reminded wituess that he bad just sworn exactly the opposite to what plaintiff had said, and one of them must have sworn falsely.) Cross-examined—Authorised If. B. Smith to write plaintiff about the cattle dyiug. Judgment was reserved till Friday, 12th February. Camming* v. Scoles.—His Worship delivered judgment herein as follows :—ln this case the plaintiff, ia aeoordaaoe with iuatniotionii given hitfl'

by Mr Smith in his letter of the 3rd November, 1885, delivered eight bullocks to defendant, and from the testimony of plaintiff and his witnesses (Scott And Monson), the cattle at delivery appeared to be in as fresh a condition as could fairly be expected, after driving the distance from the Branches. And as defendant received the cattle into his otrn paddock, thereby taking delivery and Cession of them, plaintiff in my opinion was no u er responsible for them. Although defendant denies taking delivery in one sense, his testimony is unsupported by any other. He does not deny authorising Smith to write to plaintiff to fetch the cattle down, and there is no evidence to show that the cattle so brought down was not those which Smith agreed to pay £3 per head for on behalf of defendant. The weight of evidence being altogether on the plaintiff's side, I cannot do otherwise than give hiin a judgment. Judgment for plaintiff for amoaiit (£24) claimed, with costs £8 Is.

J. Wenkheim v. M. Brich.—Mr Turton said the parties had settled, hut £1 Is. professional fee had not been paid. However, he would not offer any opposition, and if the fee were not paid would summons for it. Case Btruck out.

S. Moore v. F. Mangan.—Claim for £2B 2s 6d. Mr Turton for plaintiff. Mr Smith, for defendant, admitted the debt. Judgment for amount claimed, with costs, £3 12s. W. G. Donne v. C. Lothian.—Claim for £6 5s 9d. Judgment by default, with costs, £1 3s.

PROTECTION ORDER. Anderson v. Anderson.—A complaint by a wife against her husband, asking for protection from illtreatment and for property held by her as a hoarding house keeper at Skippers leefs. Mr Turton tor complainant. Mr Smith, for defendant, asked for an adjournment for eight or ten days, as he had been unable to get his witness' down in time. After argument the Bench decided to hear the case, stating that, although it might be heard ex parte, defendant would have the right to a re-hearing and could get an order to reverse any decision that might be given against him in the present suit if not satisfied.

Rather lengthy evidence was given by complainant (Mary Anderson) and H. A. Evans, storekeeper, Skippers reefs, at the conclusion of which his Worship said that, under the circumstances, he could grant the order asked for—sach order to include the custody by complainant of her infant children.

Thursday, ISth February.

(Before Meesrs J. Reid (Mayor) and W. Warren,

J.P.'s.)

ASSAULT.

James Halberts was charged with having, on the 26th January last, at Glenorchy, assaulted one J. B. Neale, by striking him with his (defendant's) fist. Mr Smith appeared for complainant. Mr Turton, for defendant, pleaded not guilty. J. B Neale deposed that whilst looking through the tunnel of the Invincible Co.'a mine, on the date in question, defendant came up and struck him with his fist twice without saving a word, and was about to strike again when witness naught hold of his arm. Witness wrote a letter on the 20th January to defendant, cautioning him against the consequence of spreading certain ilefanlting reports alK>ut wituess. (Letter read.) Frcwan and Mulholland were present at the time of assault. Cross-examined—Frew an was summonsed to appear, but witness did not tender him his expenses. Witness had a ri.d't to go into the Invincible mine at any time. Witness asked one of the men what shift defendant was on, but not for the purpose of going to the mine to assault defendant. Never said he was j:oing to thrash different parties in the mine. Johnson have sii«l that witness went there to quarrel with defendant, but lie did n<>t say so after what witness told him. Never said anything against defendant. Never quarrelled with J. Davis, but h<? did with witness. Saw J. M'lVugall about an hour after the assault, but never said he wanted to beat defendant.

Mr Smith at this asked for an adjournment, as it would l>e impossible to complete his side of •the case uuiess Frcwan and Mulholland were present; the one had been served with n suhpreua to appear, but the other could not be served in time.

After some argument tlic case was adjourned for a week, with costs to defendant £3, and professional ice £1 Is., to be paid by Monday, the 22nd instant.