Resident Magistrate's Courts.

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 1829, 24 July 1891, Page 3

Resident Magistrate's Courts.

QUEENBTOWN, JUL?, 13th, 1891 (Before J. N. Wood, Esq., R.M.) Reld v. Downey.—Summons not served. Case held over. Lake County Council v. G. Barnett.—Claim for "£3 12s, amount of two years' rates due on sections at Miller's Flat, of which defendant was put down u occupier. Defendant, in person, pleaded not indebted except for one years' rates, as he had gone to the office of the Council about the matter before the last rate was struck to have his name taken off and Collin Allan's substituted, and the assistant clerk had said the thing would be all right. He was willing to pay one year's rent. Besides he had not even been on the land for 15 months. J. Black, collector of rates for the county said the assistant clerk had no business to do such a thing as he was not the collector of rates. The proper course to adopt was to send in the request in writing, and unless defendant did so, he would be charged for the next rate also. Defendant's name was down on the list as occupier and witness could do nothing else but look to the occupier for rates. The Magistrate said he was sorry, as defendant had not occupied the land for such a long time, but he would have to pay. Judgment for plaintiff with coats, 6s. Afternoon Sittings. J. Byrne v. Ham Hi.—Claim for 5s 3d, balance of account. Plaintiff appeared in person ; defendant, who was represented by Mr Turton, pleaded not indebted. Counsel stated that, should the decision be against defendant it would involve him in several hundred; of pounds as he was beingsued as a partner—Lee Chong, his former mate who bought the articles—being dead. George Ah Sing was sworn as interpreter, but plaintiff objected to him as being an interested party and that he was the cause of the money not being paid. The objection, however, was over-ruled. J. Byrne, storekeeper, Queenstown, deposed that bacon and potatoes, to the value of 93 3d, had been bought by the deceased Lee Chong in November last, and 4s paid on account, leaving a balance of 5s 3d. Defendant was a partner of the deceased and. witness now sued to recover the amount due. Thomas Bell, gave evidence as to a partnership having existed. Ham Hi, in defence, said he knew nothing about the goods, and had not been in partnership with Lee Chong for four years previous to his death. (Evidence was then taken proving that the house, furniture, etc., belonged personally to defendantno partnership existing.) The Bench, in ruling, said he had no doubt that there was no partnership existing and he would therefore give judgment for defendant without costs. Mr Turton asked for professional fee as plaintiff had been prompted by several interested creditors in court, but his Worship declined to allow any. M. J. Malaghan v. J. Wenfeheim.—Claim for £1 Is 6d, value of three bags of oats, the property of plaintiff, taken by defendant. Mr Finn for plaintiff; Mr Turton, for defendant pleaded a general denial, and stated that defendant was never in possession of the oats, and secondly, that the oats in question were the property of defendant Counsel then addressed the Bench similarly as in previous case (Rosa v. Wenkheim) after which be called witnesses. J. Calghsu's evidence was very lengthy. All the agreements made, money advanced, grain remuneration, rent of farm, etc., having been gone into. He was of opinion there was no agreement between himself and defendant. The evidence of Peter Colghan (son of previous witness) was precisely similar to that given in previous case, also that of R. Ross. The former, in his evidence, got slightly mixed, when he said defendant had to get no oats and be knew nothing of his father's business. Counsel for the defence asked him what he meant by saying "I might bring your oats to-morrow, Mr Wenkheim," which admitted that defendant was to receive some. Witness, however, could give no explanation. J. Wenkheim's evidence also comprised the transactions with J. Colghan, and in return for money advanced by witness oats were to be returned. Witness had time after time put off with the excuse "I'll bring yours to-morrow," and, on the day in question, 17th June, witness rode out on purpose to meet young Colghan. Met him about Eichardt's garden, with a load of oats which Colghan said were for witness, but that there might be better ones at home. Witness looked at them and said they would do, and would go ahead and prepare a place for them—which he did. Met the young man between Thomson's and the chinaman's house and walked with him down to plaintiffs when Colghan threw the reins to witness and said drive on as he (Colshan) had some business to do with plaintiff. Witness took the reins and was driving on when he heard someone shouting " Stop, stop !" and on looking round saw Mr Ross coming up with some shining instrument in his hand. Witness said to him " I'll have it, even if you put a knife through me," and those were the words used which plaintiff in the previous case had turned to suit his own purpose. Witness commenced to unload the oats at his own place, while Ross commenced shoving and hitting him in the stomach (laughter) to prevent him unloading, and he (Ross) hit witness and hurt him that he could hardly eat any dinner afterwards, his stomach pained so (laughter). Witness had nearly all the oats off when Ross came and took them away. Have still got three bags of which Colghan sent in for witness. There was an agreement between Colghan and witness, and the former in his evidence did not speak the truth. W. J. Thomson, storekeeper, deposed that he bought 200 bushels of oats (half of which were taken by plaintiff) to enable Colghan to pay rent for his farm, as he was only allowed a short time to do so or be turned out. This concluded the evidence, and his Worship, in ruling, said :—There can be no doubt that the oats weie sent expressly by Colghan to Malaghan's store and also that some sort of an agreement has been arrived at between the former and defendant, and which Colghan has not carried out. The boy who brought the oats has also been in a good school and leurned his lesson well, He was told to bring the oats to plaintiff,, but defendant has been put off from time to time, and the words used about better oats at home were only another excuse. He had his lesson well learnt; but, at the same time I must give judgment to plaintiff for amount, £1 Is 6d; costs, 6s : professional fee, £1 Is; total, £2 8s 6d.