MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LII, Issue 15951, 23 June 1915, Page 5

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

LOGS SUPPLIED TO MILL.

DISPUTE AS TO NUMBER.

Mr. C. C. Kettle, S.M., was engaged yesterday in hearing the conclusion of a case in which Thomas William Slater and Harry Pinney, of Auckland, timber contractors, claimed £23 3s 7d from the Takapuna Timber Company for logs alleged to have been supplied. Mr. W. D. M. Glaister appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr. L. A. Campbell, instructed by Messrs. Stewart ind Johnson, represented the de fendant company.

When evidence had been heard at length, the magistrate said that the case was one in which the parties had acted honestly, but a dispute had arisen as t/> the number of locs supplied. If the logs had been counted and the specifications had been taken by plaintiffs in the first place, the Court would not have been occupied for eight or nine hours over a wretched dispute. His Worship considered that the checking methods adopted by defendant were the most correct. He held that the plaintiffs were only entitled to recover on the measurements sworn to by the defendants. On His Worship's suggestion, plaintiffs accepted a nonsuit, with costs.

A NEGLECTFUL UNIONIST. The Auckland Drivers' Union (Mr. A. E. Skelton) claimed £1 5s 6d, representing 17 months' subscription arrears, from P. McCormack, labourer. Defendant admitted that he had joined the union, but had neglected to resign. He said he was in poor circumstances. Judgment was entered for plaintiff for the amount claimed. COST OF DIVIDING-FENCE. 8. H. Matthews (Mr. C E. Matthews) claimed from J. Thomas £3 2s, half cost of repairing a dividing-fence between properties occupied by the parties. Judgment was given for plaintiff for £2 Is 9d. with costs. DEFAULT CASES. Judgment by default, with costs, was entered for plaintiffs in the following cases:—Mount Albert Borough Council v. Alfred Arnold Hansen, iun,, Edendale, £8 16s 4d; James Crombie v. William Pelly, Ponsonby, 9s 8d; J. Andrew and Sons v, E. Knox, Epsom, 12s; Mrs. L. Gerrighty v. Claude Griffiths, Otahuhu, £6 14s; Isabella Bentley v. Percy Johns, Epsom, £1 Is; Emily Mills v. Percy Johns, Epsom, £1 6s Id; Edwin H. B. Milsom v. F. R. Walker, Mount Eden, £3 7s; Robertson Brothers v. W. J. McFadden, Patumahoe, £10 3s 6d; A. H. Nathan, Limited, v. Mrs. E. A. MacDonald, Te Kuiti, £3 9s 7d; Arthur Tooman and Co., Ltd., v. Morley arid Co., Stanley Street. £14 12s 9d; Strange and Co. v. S. R. Hill, Albert Street, £2 4s; Griffiths, Fraser, and Co., Ltd., v. B. Edwards, Tauranga, £8 17p 3d; Wilson and Horton v. Innesßros., Hamilton, £4; A. A. Green and Co. v. T. E. Roe, New Lynn, £4 9s lid; A. A. Green and Co. v. W. Condell, New Lynn, £16 2s 3d; L. A. Stanley v. L. Ross, Birkenhead, £2 7s . 8d; Takapuna Borough Council v. Theophill Collard, Wellington, £1 16s 4d; Takapuna Borough Council v. A. Langsford, Birkenhead, £7.12s 6d; Takapuna Borough Council v. B. E. Williams, Dargaville, £5 5s 4d; Emily Mills v. J. McDermott, Epsom, 131s 8d; Emily Mills v. William Fisher, 19s 9d; Auckland Tailors' Union v. Frederick Cleaver, Karangahape Road, £2 33; New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Co., Ltd., v. W. Burgoyne, Awanui North, £1 17s 4d; A. Cleave and Co., Ltd., v.-J. A. Fraser, Palmerston North, £2 6s 3d; A. Cleave and Co.. Ltd., v. Herbert Leicester. Wellington, £6; Dexter and Crozier, Ltd, v. N.P. Nielson, Takapau, £7 8s 10s; Wright Bros, v. F. ■ J. Baggstrom, Karangahape Road, £2 9s 6d; H. R. Wright v. William A. Parker, WEangarei, £37 Bs' 9d; J. D. Roberts v. Mrs. R. Bennett, Thames, £4 3s Id; Mount Albert Borough Council v. Isabella R. Baxter, Mount Albert, £1 17s 3d; Mount Albert Borouch Council v. John F. Foster, £2 13s Id; Mount Albert Borough Council v. Alfred Arnold Hansen, jun., £1 10s Id; Mount Albert Borough Council v. Florence Dean and Kenneth Urquhart, £1 4s lid!»Mount Albert 'Borough Council v. F. Hunt, £1 16s 6d: Mount Albert Borough Council v. Albert Charles T. Lamb, Morningside,£s 9s 9d: E. A. Perkins v. B. M. Morley and Co.. Stanley Street, £114 19s 5d;"J. C." Johnson v. F. L. McDonald, £6 4s 6d.