RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume IV, Issue 1190, 6 September 1867, Page 4

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thursday. (Before Tlios. Beckham, Esq., R.M.) JUDGMENTS CONFESSED. Harrison and Bcid t. Springall, Mr. "Weston for defendant; E. Foley v. T. J. Utting, £1 10 s . Mr. J. Russell for plaintiff. B. HOBNE V. PETTIE. Claim £7 15s, for a suit of clothes. "Mr. Beveridge for plaintiff; Mr. Wynn for the defendant. . ~ » This was a claim for the price of a suit ot clothes, which defendant ordered on the /-.ncl of Marcb last, which tlie defendant afterwards refused to take, saying that ho did not hnd it convenient to pay for them. The defence was that the plaintilt had. mistaken his remedy, and that the action should have been for damages sustained by defendant S refusing to rcccive the clothes, and not for the full price of them. In answer to a question by the Bench, plaintiff said that the clothcs were still in his possession. His "Worship said if the course suggested by the learned counsel for the defendant were pursued, tailors would refuse to make a suit of clothes according to order unless a deposit were paid in advance, a course which would no doubt often prove inconvenient to some customers, many of whom would have to go without new clothes, although in the present case he would give judgment for plaintiff for the amount , claimed, the clothes-to be handed over to defendant. TV. B. JACKSON V. G. BENNETT. Claim £2 10s, alleged damage to plaintiff's garden by defendant's goat. Defendant had paid 12s into Court. _ Plaintiff appeared in Court and exhibited a very fair sized specimen of the Norfolk Island pine which appeared to have been very closely cropped by some very herbacious quadruped* He deposed that his garden was an ornamental one, and that its contents had lost a good deal of their ornamental appearance through the voracious appetite of the trespasser. A witness was called for the plaintiff, who deposed that the garden was left secure at night, and on the following morning it was found to present a very woe-begone appearanco. On looking round the garden the witness discovered the destroyer in the shape of a goat. Another witness deposed that he believed the damage was attributable to the nocturnal trespasser before alluded to. The defence was that the alleged damage was done in July last, the action not being brought into Court until September, and that the amount paid into Couet was more than sufficient to cover the damage. His "Worship, however, thought otherwise, and gave judgment for plaintiff, for the full amount less the 12s paid in. HANCOCK V. EVANS. Claim £1, for rent. Mr. Joy, 1L.8., for the defendant. In this case the plaintiff had leased the premises for a term of five years, to a man named "W arburton, and afterwards in consequence of a breach of the agreement Warburton .became a weekly tenant. Subsequently Warburton sublet the place to the present defendant, and sued him for'occupation of the premises, and obtained judgment. The defence was that the plaintiff was not defendant's landlord, and that plaintiff should have procured a writ of ejectment. His Worship nonsuited the plaintiff. DODDS AND COXIiB V. COOXE. Claim £19 19s for work and labour. Mr. Joy, LL.B., appeared for plaintiff; Mr. Beveridge for the defence. This was a claim for painting and graining done to Bobertson's buildings in the Kyber Pass BoacL The defence was that the work had been performed under a sub-contract which had been paid for. After hearing the evidence on either side, his Worship said he did not see how judgment could pass for plaintiff, and Mr. Joy took a nonsuit. THOMPSON V. KILSEY. Claim £4,14s 6d, for firewood. Mr. Beveridge for plaintiff, Mr. Macdonald or the defendant. After hearing the evidence, Ms Worship gave judgment for plaintiff £2 lis. SHOEMAKEB V. CUNNINGHAir. Claim £7 3s for firewood. Mr. Beveridge for defendant. This was a claim for firewood at 6s Gd per ton. Plaintiff deposed that he had received an order from the defendant for a load of firewood at 6s 6d per ton. Had offered the wood to defendant who tendered 6s a load, and afterwards ss, but subsequently refused to pay for it. The defendant deposed that he had bought two loads of firewood from the plaintiff, and had told him that he would take a third load if it would suit him. A third load was brought which was very inferior, and plaintiff refused to accept it. His Worship nonsuited the plaintiff." B. WAIKEBV. S. BBIGHT. Claim 12s, work and labour. This was a claim for re-seating six cane chairs at 2s each. Defendant admitted having given orders for doing the work, but produced one of the chairs in Court which he stated was not re-seated in a workmanlike manner. His Worship offered tho plaintiff the option of taking judgment for 10s 6d, or finishing the chairs by beading them, in the manner desired by the defendant. Plaintiff chose the latter alternative. CASES SETTLED. Thos. Eussell v. T. Hill, £2 6s 2d. Mr. J. Bussell for defendant. In this case plaintiff did not appear, and defendant having come from Motuihi, a distance of 20 miles, his costs were allowed; J. Harrison v. Edger and Gilchrist, lis. CASES ADJOTJBMED. Estate Jones and Co. v. Henderson, £14 15s lOd; Craig v. Phillips, £13 ; Bridges v. Quick, £20. The Court rose at 1.30 p.m.