CITY POLICE COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXXVII, Issue 5557, 7 April 1905, Page 2

CITY POLICE COURT.

THURSDAY. APRIL 6. (Before Dr A. McArthur, S.M.) Mary Springfield, for drunkenness, ■■•. as fined 10s Gd, in default twenty-four hours’ imprisonment. CIVIL BUSINESS. Judgment was given for plaintiff by default in each of the following cases:— C. W. Wycherley and Son v. Daniel O'Sullivan, IDs, costs 13s ; H. O. Gibbons and Co. v. Sylvanus B. R. Budge, £1 9s 9d, costs I3s; X. Guthridge, Ltd., v. John F. Griffith, £lB 7s lOd, costs £1 10s 6d; Commercial Agency v. Daniel Jones, £l3 IDs Id, costs £1 10s (id; same v. Kenneth Connell, £ll 11s 6d. costs £1 10s 6d; same v. Charles J. Moreton, £lB 3s lid, costs £1 10s Od; Briscoo and Co., Ltd., v. Charles L. Zimmerman, £8 8s Cd, costs ■£l 3s 6d; N. Guthridge, Ltd., v. Thomas Macauley, £5 9s 4d costs £1 5s 6d; J. O’Brien and .Co. v. James A. Smith. £4 11s 9d. costs 10s; Frederick Cooper v. Stun Yick 10s, costs only; Mnnt, Cottrell and Co. v. Bcrnarh Cahill, £1 15s, costs ss; Wong Wah and Co. v. Mary Ann Whitney. £6 7s -fid, costs £1 3s 6d; Robert K. Manley v. 'William J. Renner, £7 11s 3d, costs £1 3s (id: Edward Pearoo and Co., Ltd., v. Vernon Willeston, £3, costs £1 0s 6d. No orders wore made in the cases E. J. D. Johnson and Sous v. A. James, a debt of £3 7s, and John Wingate v. Benjamin Love, a debt of £3 ss. CARDS FOR THE RACES. Evidence was taken for the defence in the case in which George Cooksley and George Henry Harris claimed £IOO from Johnson and Sions, printers, for having, as plaintiffs allege, printed and published a book purporting to he Dio official book of. the Wellington Racing Club’s January meeting. Mr D. Findlay, for tho defence, said the evidence would show that tho information contained in the official book was available from other sources to anyone who took the trouble to get it. Edward Johnson said he did not know that with Donovan (by whom the unofficial book was ordered) ho was printing a bogus card. Ho thought for some time that it was tho official card. Ho "set up” the cover of tho book himself, and in doing so had not a copy of the official card before him. Thomas Donovan said ho had ordered the printing of Die unofficial hook in January last. Ho compiled it in the Free Public Library from various newspapers, the "New Zealand Turf Register,” old race cards and information from owners and bookmakers. Ho numbered tho horses according to the list published in the “Now Zealand Times.” The official card-list was Dio same as published previously in tho “Now Zealand Times.” He never saw the proof of tire official hook, and had no intention of deceiving the public into purchasing his book on the understanding that it was tho official hook. Mr Findlay said that an endeavour had been made by the other side to show that race clubs wero legally and fully entitled to all they claimed. It might ho a shock to racing clubs, although he thought it would not be altogether nows to them, that they had no such rights. Li-proof of this he pointed to the fact that since tho present action had been commenced the Wellington Racing Club had convritfhted the cover of its latest raoe-book. Tho rights of racing clubs bad never been established in the way Mr Bell asked for in this case. There was no , copyright in the subject matter, of the official book nor in the information contained. The copyright could only bo in the compilation. The evidence had proved that in the compiling of this unofficial book a large amount of independent labour had been put in to obtain information from newspapers, registers, etc. Mr 801 l contended that if defendants set out to put their compilation into a cover exactly corresponding with the cover of the official book of plaintiffs with the object of selling it, then there had been an infringement of copyright. Tho fraud had been attempted, and, to a great extent, perpetrated, and defendants must he prepared to pay the penalty if they were caught. Judgment was reserved until. Thursday. A CASE OF EGGS. Thompson Bros., auctioneers, sued George Pinnock, restaurant-keoper, for £37, payments due on goods (eggs) supplied. A counter-claim was put iu for £SO for breach of warranty in respect to Die supply of 12,000 eggs. Mr FindLay, who appeared for Pinnock, said that the claim was admitted—the dispute was over the counter-claim. Pinnock claimed that the eggs were bad. Evidence for the other side was to tho effect that the eggs were not fresh. Fresh eggs were being sold at tho time for Is 8d and Is lOd a dozen, and the eggs sold to Pinnock were sold with all faults at Is a dozen. Thompson Bros., for whom Mr Ward appeared, further claimed that they were selling as agents and not as principals. No warranty was given. Judgment was reserved.