MAGISTRATE’S COURT

New Zealand Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 6179, 10 April 1907, Page 2

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

TUESDAY, APRIL 9. (Before Dr McArthur, S.M.) A number of persons were charged with drunkenness. Two first-offenders were fined 5s hack, and another, who did not appear, was fined 10s; a fourth, who 1 had been found helplessly drunk at : Thonidon Railway Station, and was still ; in a nervous condition, was remanded 1 till next Tuesday. j Jeremiah Looney, for drunkenness and !an obstruction of Constable Hodgson, ! was fined £3, or forty-eight hours' imprisonment. Annie Evans, for being idle and disorderly, in having insufficient lawful means of support, was sent to prison for three months. Edward Osborne, a prohibited person, for having procured liquor from a barmaid of the Central Hotel, was fined £2 and 7s costs. Thomas James Underwood was adjudged to bo tho father of an illegitimate child, and was ordered to pay 7s Gd a week towards its maintenance, £2 Os expenses, and £2 2s costs. CIVIL CASES. Judgment for plaintiff in defendant's default was given in tho following undefended cases:—Sargood, Son. and Ewen v, Charles Uddstrora, £27 18s lid, costs £2 19s; Nicol, Stringer and Co. v. James Stephenson, £9, cost £1 10s 6d; George Winder v. Edward John Benge, .£8 7s, costs £1 13s Gel; Official Assignee v, Charles Donnor, £5, costs ss; Official Assignee v. Leonard Price, £5, costs 7s; Walter Francis v. William L. Allen, possession, £4 5s 6d, and 16s costs; Scott and Co., v, Charles Uddstrom, £2G 3s Bd, costs £2 4s; Official Assignee v. Percy Emenoy, £lO 17s Gd, costs 15s; Official Assignee v. Thomas James, £1 15s, costs 7s; Official Assignee v, Michael Tobin, £1 13s, costs ss; Official Assignee v. Frederick Board, £3 10s; City Council v. George Fear, £1 8s 3d, costs 8s; TCarori Borough Council v. Surah. Aim Baker, £2 11s 4d, costs £3 13s; Empire Loan and Discount Company, Ltd., v. William Hutchison, £l4 Cs Bd, costs 15s; Empire Loan and Discount Company, Ltd., v. W. J. Jamieson and George Henry Morris, £22 17s Gd costs £1 Gs; William Isaac v. James Arthur Datchin, £1 17s, costs 7s; Stewart Timber, Glass, and Hardware Company, Ltd., v. William Carroll, £4O 13s lid, costs £1 3s; Stewart Timber, Glass, and Hardware Company v. George Braund and Tunbridge. £l2 10s 7d, costs 15s; R. and E. Tingey and Co. v. James Davidson, £35 17s 2d, costs £2.145; Dresden Pianoforte Company v. William Murray, £7, costs £1 3s 6d; David Milligan v. Edward George Barnes, £2 10s, costs 10s; Francis Augustine Leydin r. Mrs Neil Jepson, £8 9s, costs £1 3s Gd; Sargood, Son and Ewen v. Vincenzo Almao, £64 2s lOd, costs £4 2s.

Richard Wellsby was ordered to pav £9 9s 3d to Richard G. Knight before April 25th or go to gaol for seven days; and J. R. C. Welsby to pay £1 5s 2d to George Winder before April ■ 20th, or go to gaol for three days. LAUNCH-OWNER'S CLAIM. His Worship gave judgment in the action of James M. Kelly v. Alexander Ross, in which the plaintiff claimed a refund of £92 10s, paid in respect of a contract for oil-engines, which defendant failed to supply, for a launch. Defendant counter-claimed for £92 13s for work done. It appeared that the defendant supplied a small er.gine to tho launch, but the owner subsequently had a larger engine put m by him, and the results were not satisfactory. The trouble, his Worship considered, was due to tho necessary enlargement of tho launch and to the placing of tho

exhaust-pipe under water. The plaintiff had taken the whole matter of fitting into liis own hands, and was, therefore,, responsible for any trouble that arose therefrom. Judgment was given for defendant on the claim, with costs, and on the counter-claim for £Ci, and costs, £7 10s. A BOTHER WITH BAILIFFS. Throe actions arising out of a tenancy of a house were heard together. Esraond Williams sued Wilhelm F. Eggers for £lO for wrongful distraint; his wife Jessie Cecilia Williams ivued Eggers for £ls .v for the same cause; and Frederick Jl. Pitcher, for whom Eggers had acted as agent, sued tho husband and , wife jointly as tenants lor £l7 10s rent. In the evidence it was contended that i the tenancy was tho husband’s, but the | furniture was the wife’s; tliat Eggers, j with a distress warrant, “broke into” • tho locked-up house when the tenants were out; and tliat ho did not leave in i their possession tho bedding, clothing, I and tools up to a value ot £25, ns re- j quired by law. On the other side, it j was stated that on a former occasion ( distress proceedings were suspended on | tho wife signing an undertaking to be surety for tho rent; that her furniture could therefore properly bo eoized; and that the provision for leaving £25 worth of bedding, etc., unseized dia not apply to cases where the bailiffs entrance was resisted. His Worship reserved his decision. Mr Hindmarsh was for tho tenants, and Mr Blair for the owner and : agent. j LAND TENURE. i Tho case was continued of the Crown Lands Board v. William Fountain, of Jolm«onville, claim for £95 is 4d, for occupation of sections 13 and IG, Ohariu, known as the Haw trey estate. Mr Gully was for the Board, and Mr Von Haast for the defendant. Judgment was reserved till April 25th. A DENTIST’S BILL. Wellington Trade Agency v. John Thomas Lcv r tt; claim £7 for Cental work 1 done for defendant’s daughter by Arthur i Ho by and Dr. Lowe. £3 6s, an amount ; originally agreed on, had been paid iuto ! Court, but it was alleged that with de- : fondant’s approval considerable additional work was done to fourteen teeth, including a crown, bringing the cost up to the amount claimed. Judgment was given for the plaintiffs for tho amount claimed, with cosls £1 16s. WOOL FIRE TESTER. Thomas Wilkinson Wntson v. Francis Wilson Smith. Claim £IG 3s 6cl for services rendered in supervising and assisting in the making of a patent thermometer for testing the temperature of wool bale?. The thermometer, it appeared from plaintiff’s statement, was invented by Smith, but on a test by plaintiff was foimd to be faulty. Plaintiff improved it, under Smith’s .instructions, spending a lot of time on it at tho premises of Mr Denton, engineer, of Willis street, and also spending £7 2a 6d out of pocket. Ho claimed £5 a week for Ms labour, and ijmdcrcd an account lor £ls for three weeks. The improved instrument, exhibited during the case, - was n pointed instrument, about four feet long, described by Mr Levvey <dcfoudant’s ronnssl) as “merely a gun barrel ground down to a razor uoint, with a thermometer slipped inside.’’ It was Li bo taken nn by a syndicate. A Bum < of £8 IDs had been paid on account. Tho * case was adjourned till, to-morrow. 1