MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIII, Issue 244, 12 September 1933, Page 2

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

George William Dinester, alias Denneston, aged 41, appeared before Messrs C. E. Spooner and W. G. Ashworth, J.P.’s, in the Magistrate’s Court to-day on a charge that; on September 6, a.t Palmerston North, he stole a suitcase and a quantity of clothing valued at £2, the property of Reginald Frank Churcher. Other charges preferred against accused were the theft, on September 6, of a razor and strop valued at 10s, the property of Gabriel Henry Hodges; the theft, on September 5, of two shirts and 30 collars of a value of £2 10s, the property of Ah Tom; and the theft, on September 5, of an attache case and a quantity of clothing valued at £3, the property of Patrick Herbert Coyle. Accused pleaded guilty to all charges and elected to be dealt with summarily. Senior-Detective Quirke stated that accused committed the offences while on a drinking bout. All the property had been recovered and he suggested that accused might be dealt with leniently. The Bench sentenced accused to seven days’ imprisonment on each charge, the terms to be concurrent. CLAIM FOR COMMISSION. A claim for commission on the sale of stock was heard when E. C. Wooffindin, stock dealer, of Palmerston North, proceeded against B. C. VValdegrave, stock buyer, of Palmerston North, claiming that about the month of July, 1932, he entered into an arrangement with defendant whereby the parties were to share equally commission earned on sales effected through their combined efforts. Plaintiff claimed that defendant . received full commission on various occasions and failed to account for it to plaintiff. Five transactions were involved, the total sum claimed being £8 12s. It was further claimed, in terms of an agreement between the parties, that plaintiff was entitled to the sum of 19s 9d, being l alf cost of droving and advertising for sale three heifers and 8s to cover his expenses when he attended as a witness for defendant in a civil action. Mr A. W. Yortt appeared for plaintiff and Mr A. M. Ongley for defendant. The defence was a complete denial that plaintiff had been associated with defendant in the transactions as alleged, and at the conclusion of the hearing the Bench announced that they considered plaintiff had established his case in that there had been a working agreement between the parties on a profit-sharing basis. In one instance the circumstances were somewhat vague and judgment would be given in favour of plaintiff for £6 os. Court costs £2 9s were allowed.