RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume V, Issue 1313, 31 January 1868, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Thursday. ffRIKKWit V. P. S. MACKENZIE (jUBSMIKr). i Claim £10 10.'. Hia Worship said tlie action in this case was founded upon an illegal contract, which vitiated the claim. This would be shown by voferen eto the case of Simpson v. Bloas, ex parte Bell* A nonsuit must be recorded. 0 Judgments fob Plaintiffs. W. Poaenukie v. H. Hunter. £8 -s. 6d; Trustees of B. Home v. T. B. Cameron £3 16s, goods ; W. Naylor v. H. Black, £5 15s. wages, Mr. Joy for plaintiff; Henderson and Maefarlane v. J. George £19 13j. lOd goods, Mr. Beveridge for plaintiff; J. Soppett v. ThomaAshepherd, £5 153. goods, Mr. Jojr for plaintiff. E. TATLOB V. W. WEAVER. Claim £4 19s. for refreshments supplied on the occasion of the election for City JEast, in which defendant was a candidate. Mr. Wynn for plaintiff, Mr. Baveridge for defendant. Sir. Beveridge asked for his learned friend's defence. His "Worship said that the New Resident Magistrate's Court Act did not render it compulsory upon counsel to disclose their defence. Mr. Beveridge: My learned friend does net call upon me to prove the items of the account. His Worship: lhen the only question is the responsibility. Mr. Wynn : There is another point in the Elections P.emulation? Act. William Giifflr;. deposed: I know the plaintiff and defendant. I know that Mr. Weaver waß recently ft candidate for Auckland City E&et. 1 acted in that election as agent for Mr. Weaver. I was employed by Mr. Samuel Cochrane on behalf of Mr. Weaver. It was in Mr. Weaver'? presanro, and with his | consen . T wsa ir.str -j.oiad by Z." r- Oocurano to cor™ I : for City iiust on behali of Mr. I Wep '' .-, et'ndidate. Such tUng* as .dfreshmtnts ' *' ; t in «.iy tends. I hud specific orders ftoa ! Mt. -iclirane to do I thought necessary—in | other worde he left the whoiii to me. I did not send | for any refreshments to Mr. Taylor that I can remember. My usual practice ie— Mr- Wynn: We don't want to know what your practica iB, confine yourself to the case, i lta-examined: 1 went to Mr. Taylor's immediately after the election was over. I Mr. Beveridge :To have a meal. Mr. Wynn : Was that necessary in the election ? Mr. Beveridge . Yes, their spirits were exhausted by their electioneering labors. It was only tea and coffee. His Worship: Were the spirits of the voters exhausted too. 1 see there sre 29 meals here. Be-examined: A number of the canvassers went Mr. Weaver was successful, and we went lv,vr- lo have a temperance jollification—not much of a jullificatioa. Refreshments wer« ordered for the polling bnolh. Could not say where they came from. Knew a man named MoDougal—one of the canvasssrs, and a very active man. It is most likely that he had something to do with getting refreshments. Cannot say whether Mr. Weaver partook of the refreshment. It is likely that in the excitement E mny have given a verbal order for the refreshmen:!?. Cross-examined by Mr. Wynn: I did not give written orders for the refreshments. My usual custom is to enter the order in my pocket book, and to tear out the leaf and to give it to the per&on I send for them. * By Mr. Beveridge: I did see Mr. Weaver about the bill, and he said I was to go to Mr. Cochrane and get the bill from Taylor. Tbe bill is very reasonable. I have known an election t'> cost £100, but I suppose in these hard times it is different. Barbara Lindsay, deposed: I take charge of Mr. Taylor's refre.'hment rooms in his absence. The refreshments were supplied to Mr. Grilin, the clerks, and other men. They had. 20 meal?. The bread and cheese was supplied to McDougal, who came down in a carriage for them.

Wil'.mni Weaver, dopiKed that-he recollected a conversation about tho election, Mr. Griffin, was to Tβceive £1 per day, and the clerks 10s a-diiy. Never gave him to pledge hie credit. Cross-examined: Was aware thit refreshments were ordered, but was not aware that it had been' in his name, until ho received the bill. When he received the bill, witness wrote on the back of it that he never authorised the refreshments to bo ordered; and would not pay for them. Nover ate any of the bread and cheese. Did not think he was bound to pay this bill. Had paid quite sufficient. _ His Worship was of opinion that plaintiff could ■carcely recover upon such evidence. Mr. Beveridge took a nonsuit. W. BUCHANAN V. BISHOP. Claim £3 8s; (roods. , , Mr. Beveridge for plaintiff. Mr. Wynn far dofendDefendant in thi» case alleged positively that he had paid the sum now charged. Mr. Bereridge t>ok a nonsuit. l>. JI. LKWISSON V. K. MASKS. Claim £1, lor repairs to a pipe, &c. Mr. Joy appeared for plaintiff, Mr. Wynn for defendant. . . This was a claim for repairs to a pipe, iuticg amber mouthpiece, &c. Defendant enid ho had left a pipe wxth plaintiff for repairs which hod not been returned. Ho had another pipe repaired by plaintiff, which had been fitted with " a kauri gum mouthpiece." Might owe 4e 6d for that. > Eie Worship after the evidenco gave judgment for plaiutiff, ds 6d. JUDGMENTS CONFESSED. Lewis Bios. v. S. Morgan, £5 16j 6d. ::. CASES AT.7OUUXBD. Trustees Arthur and. £on v. D. Oliphint, £3 143, (next Thursday; Saaie v. K. Graham, £2 9s 6id, (next Thursday) ; Same v. J. Warburton, 18s 4d, (next Thursday). This concluded the business.