Resident Magistrate's Court.

Marlborough Express, Volume XIV, Issue 1121, 2 April 1879, Page 7

Resident Magistrate's Court.

Blenheim, Monday, March 31. (Before H. Mclntire, Esq., R.M.) There were no police cases before the Court. 'Plie following civil business was disposed of:— Prothero v. Stanton. This was a case pending in the R. M. Court at Nelson, in which the plaintiff sued the defendant for wrongfully converting to his own use a licensed hackney cab, a chestnut mare, and a set of silver-mounted harness. The plaintiff sought to recover £BO. Mr Sinclair, who appeared for the defendant, asked for the evidence of a witness, John Yerry, to be taken here. The R.M. asked if notice had been given to the defendant ? Mr Sinclair said that section 3 of the “ R. M. Evidence Act,” prescribed the mode by which process was to be served ; and acting on the presumption that whatever was to be done was rightly and regularly done, although no affidavit of service of notice on the plaintiff had been sent to the clerk of the Court here by the Nelson office, as ought to have been done, yet he would ask that the evidence should now be taken, subject to its being rejected if it were found, that due notice had not been given to the plaintiff. .John Yerry. blacksmith. Blenheim, deposed ; —I \now'the" plaintiff, ThbmaiT’P'rothero, and the defendant, William Moses Stanton. In March, 1878, I purchased a cab from Mr Prothero, and also a chestnut mare and a set of harness, for £65. Prothero gave me possession of the cab, mare, and harness. I paid him £35 at the time ; the balance was to be paid in 12 months. Prothero has not applied to me for the balance ; I am now ready to pay the amount. On the 7th March, 1878, I executed a Bill of sale over the cab, mare, harness, and other goods to Mr Stanton. I represented to him that these goods, &c., were mine ; Prothero was told of my dealings with Stanton. Some days after executing this Bill of Sale, I am not aware I signed a bailment from Prothero to myself of the cab, mare, and harness ; I did not read the document; I did not intend by signing that paper to give Prothero a prior ciaim to that of Stanton on the cab, &c. About a week after I bought the cab Prothero went away. I heard he went to Sydney, and I have not heard anything of him since then until I heard of this action. ■ i _ The evidence was then signed by the, witness, and after being certified to by the Court, will be forwaided to Sydney In regard to costs, in answer to Mr Sinclair, the R.M. said he would allow two guineas Counsel’s fee. i . ! 1 Mr Sinclair said he did not desire to press the matter, but he thought the maximum fee of three guineas should be allowed. It was not only in these cases that Counsel had to appear in Court, but there were other things which had to be done, and ; n this case he had had to telegraph as well as to fill up papers in duplicate. The R. M. said he would allow three guineas Counsel’s fee, and lOsfor expenses of the witness Yerry. . , M LAURENCE V. BARTLETT. This was an action to recover £5 on an 1.0. U. When the case was called on, it was stated that defendant had confessed judgment. GOMEZ. V. FOWLER. In this case plaintiff claimed L 3 6s fop 'the service of the entire horse, Sir Colin. Neither of the parties appeared, and the case was struck out.