RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 1117, 20 July 1865, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Wi;j>nksi>ay, 19tu July. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq., R.M.)

Drunk and Disorderly.—Mary Ann Williamson, for having been ilrunk and disorderly in Walker street, was fined 20s or forty-eight hours' imprisonment. Mary Ann M'Dondd, for having been drunk, was fined 20s or forty-eight hours' imprisonment. Mary Ann Anderson was charged with disorderly conduct in the Arcade, and was fined 10s and co-ts. Alexander Moffat and Elias Harding were charged with disturbing the public peace by fighting in the Arcade. Mr Ward appeared for Moffat, and produced witnesses who proved that he was employed by Mr Johnston, of the Arj_'yie Hotel, to clear the house at ten o'clock. When .Moffat got Harding outside the hotel, he struck Moffat a blow on the face, and they fought until the constable came up. Moffat was discharged, and Harding was fined 30* or three d»ys' imprisonment. Samuel Barnes was cnarged with fightins in the Arcade. He did not appear, and was fined 20s and costs. Daniel Christie and George Wilson, for having baen drunk, were each fined 20s or forty-eight hours' imprisonment. civil- cases. William Knox v. John France.—Claim of 10s for education rates levied by the Caversham School Committee. Judgment by consent, with co«ts. Same v. William M'F. Pollock.—Claim of L 3 for education rates. The defence was that no notice of the assessment had been served. The plaintiff stated that he served the original notice on the defendant's property, and had no copy of ii. The Magistrate informed the plaintiff that he ought to have kept the original notice, and been ready to swear in Court that he served a copy of it on the defendant. Plaintiff nonsuited.

J. L. C. Richardson, Acting Snperintentendent of the Province, v. Gapfaiti MatbeSO3. —Claim or Ll6 for sundry jetty dues levied on gooda landed out of the defendant's lighter, The Brothers, from October >"th, 18G4, to February 14th, 1865. The defence was, that on the sth of December, he received an account from the then col-

lector of jett/ dues, Mr Lawrie, for Ll 6 7s 6d, which he pafd by a cheqfls. He produced this cfeegue arid! said that when he granted it, be believctl it was in full payment of all duet? for which he was then indebted to the Government. He admitted being due L 6, for dues levied after the sth December. There was a further action against the defendant ior Lll, the amount of jtetty dues levied on the defendant's lighter, the Lady Franklin, and the Magistrate said he could not decide the first case until he had heard the second. The plaintifFs case was proved, that the defendant's lighter came alongside on tha dates charged for. For the defence a receipt for LlO signed hy Mr Lawrie, the late collector, was put in, and Mr Wilson took an objection that this was a splitting of an action. The Magistrate over-ruled this objection, as the actions were raised upon transactions with different vessels. But he considered that the cheque and the receipt signed by Mr Laurie must be taken as proof of payment up to the dates for which they were charged. It was clear that the Government books had been kapt very carelessly, because no credit had been given to the defendant for either of the two sums of Ll6 7s 6d, or HO which had been paid by the defendant to the Government Collector. On one account it was submitted that L 6 was due, and on the other L 2, and he would give judgment for the plaintiff L 8 on both actions, and costs.

Same v. William Itoyae, as owner of the schooner Dolphin.—Claim of L 2 for jetty dues. The defendant denied being owner ol the vessel, but lie had admitted his ownership by previously making payments on account. The defendant theu pleaded that on the occasion for which the dues were charged, the Dolphin culd not get alongside the jetty, and discharged the larger portion of her cargo into a punt, and then came alongside nearly empty. The Magistrate said it did not matter whether the vessel bad only an infinitesimal portion of cargo in h-r, the charge for jetty dues was made on her registered tonnage, and not on the quantity ol goods brought to the jstty. Judgment for the plaintiff with costs. James Brown v. John Marks. —Claim of L2S3 9d for drapery goods supplied. The defence was that 7s lid of this account was paid when the goods were bought. Judgment for the plaintiff Ll 17.i 10d, and costs.

Duncan Stewart v. Edward M'Glashnn. —Ciaim of L4l ss, reduced to 1/20, for sundry expenses incurred on defendant's account, while the plaintiff was acting as manager on the defendant's station. The plaintiff stated tluit he was empowered by the defendant to employ labor on the several occasions mentioned in the bill of particulars, for the driving o( sheep, the carting of wool, and other works in counection with the station. lie paid the workmen the expenses they incurred, and had not been repiid by the plaintiff. Mr Hagirit appeared for the defendant, and in cross-examination the plaintiff admitted that he received from M;.« s Gillies and Street, for Mr M'Glashan, L 29 43, but he said the payment was not made on account of the items of work now charged for. Mr Hag^it produced a receipt for the L 29 4J, and the plaintiff admitted his signature. To this receipt was attached a letter from the defendant to the plaintiff, tolling him to call on Messrs Gillies and Street, and he would receive p:iyme:it in full for his claim. The receipt signed by ihs plaintiff was an acknowledgment of having received payment in full of all claims against the defendant. Case dismissed.

Judgments by default were given in the following cises :—William Knox, collector to the Caversham School Committee, v. Henry Miller, 10s for education rates; Same v. Archibald M'Ciiliutn, 10s far rates; George Baker v. J. H. Hughes, L 3 3s for rent.

Dismissed for non appearance.—Ferguson and Mitchell v.John Munro, L2O; C. M. Rymer v. Samuel C mpyr, L2O.