RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Otago Daily Times, Issue 1121, 25 July 1865, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Monday, 24tii July. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq.., R.M.) Dkdnk Asm Disobderly.—Alexander Frazer and Michael Flannigan were each fined 203 or 48 hours' imprisonment for having been drank. Alexander Fawcett, a colored bootblack, was charged with a breach of the peace by fighting in Walker street. The defendant said he only struck in self-defence; but the constable stated that he found the prisoner beating a man cruelly, lying on hi«n and biting him. The prisoner called another colored bootblack as a witness, who said that a man named Keasley insulted the prisoner by saying to him, " These bootblacks are always smelling round here," and struck him in the eye with a stick. The man Keaaley, also a colored man, was called, aud denied having insulted the prisoner. On the contrary, he maintained that the prisoner without any provocation, insulted him by calling him "Ad Jamaica nigger," and immediately set on him, beating him unmercifully, while he was unable to de-fe-id himself because he had been in Hospital for five months with a diseased foot. The defendant was fined 303 and costs, or four days' imprisonment. Ann Nolan was charged, on bail, with fighting in Manse street, and was fined 20s and costs. James Burnes, a seaman, was charged with a very obscene and beastly exposure in Cumberlaud street, at one o'clock on Sunday last, lie was severely reprimanded by the | Magistrate, and sent to jail for two months, | with hard labour.

Stealing a Lockkt and Chain-.—James O'Neil was charged, on the information of laahella Johnston, with stealing, on the 21st instant, from her house one gold chain, one locket, and a hunch of scab, valued, for the purposes of the information, at 20a. The complainant's statement was that the prisoner accompanied her home on Saturday night. She took off her chain and locket, and put it on her dressing table. The prisoner then asked her to go for a bottle of porter. She went for it ; and when she came hack, the prisoner was gone, and the locket and chain also. Detective Rowley stated that from information received on Saturday night from the complainant, he arrested the prisoner on board the New Zealand steamship. On accusing him of the theft, and saying that he would be searched, he took the missing chain and locket out of hu pocket, saying that the complainant \va3 due him Ll, and he took the chain for it. The prisoner now said that he purchased the chain from the complainant for Ll. A previous conviction for larceny on j the Dunstan was put in against the prisoner, and he was sentenced to three months' imprisonment with hard libor. Stealing Fencing —Charles Smith was j charged with breaking and carrying away j part of a fence round the property of Frederick Jones in Moray Place, on the night of the 22nd instant. The prisoner admitted having taken away one piece of j the fence. The constable stated that he \ saw the prisoner breaking down the fence, and he carried away one piece of it. Mr Jones stated that hi* fence hud frequently been broken down, and he had lost property in consequence. He could not say that the prisoner ever broke down his fence previously. The prisoner pleaded that this was his first offence, and he was sent to gaol for one week. CIVIL CASES. William M'Taggart v. George Mundle. —Claim of Ll4, cash lent in September, 18G1, and L 5 9s for two years and a half's interest, at the rate of 10 per ct-nt. per annum. The plaintiff's case was that he and the defendant were working together in connection with lighters iti 1861. The defendant received bad news from Wellington, and wished to proceed there. lie borrowed the money from the plaintiff to go north. The plaintiff had not the money of his own, but he borrowed the amount from Mr Galbraith, of the Port Chalmers Hotel, and gave it to the defendant. Sometime afterwards the plaintiff repaid the money to Mr Galbraith; and when the defendant returned, as master of the Storm Bird, he promised to pay back the money on his next trip, but the plaintiff had never again seen the defendant until he saw him in Court. The defence was, that in 1801 he was in partnership with the plaintiff and others, as stevedores, at Port Chalmers. When he got this money from the defendant, L4O was owing to him on the partnership accounts, and it was out of this sum that he got the money, until the accounts were settled. Afterwards there was a settling up of all the partnership transactions, and the money now sued for was included in that settlement. Since that time he had never heard a word about this claim, although he had been regularly trading to this Port. Mr Galbraith stated that when the money was borrowed both plaintiff and defendant were present, and the receipt he got was signed by both. When he lent it he understood that there was an open account standing between th© plaintiff and defendant, and that money was coming to the defendant out of work done in lightering certain ships, in conjnnction with the plaintiff. The Magistrate had not the shadow of a doubt that this was a partnership transaction, and the money was advanced to the defendant out of money which was comiug to him at the time. Case dismissed.

A. Cleve and Co. v. George Mundle.— Claim of L 3, for the value of 20 lbs of tobacco, a deficiency of one half-tierce shipped on board the Ilangitira for Wellington on the 29th November, 1864, and Ll° 10a as Customs duty paid by the plaintiffs on the same. The plaintiffs' case was that 7 half-tierces of tobacco were, on the date mentioned, shipped under bond on board the steamer Rangatira, of which the defendant is master. Before being shipped the Customs locker weighed the tierces mentioned, and in no case were any of them more than 2 lbs short of the original weight. There was no 3uch deficiency as •20 lbs. Mr W, Mills, of the Customs, proved that the original weight of the half-tierce in question, when shipped, was 345 lbs and he received a document from Wellington showiug that there was 20 lbs of a deficiency when it arrived at Wellington. Mr Wilson, for the defence, objected to this document going in, and it was not allowed. Mr Wilson asked for a AT THE

nonsuit on the ground that the deficiency had not been proved. The Magistrate agreed with Mr Wilson, and nonsuited the plaintiff.

Bank of Otago (Limited) as assignees in the estate of Bell, Rae and Co., v. Michael S. Duthy and John Lynch!— Claim of Ll6 17s 7d for window sashes and other goods supplied. One of the defendants asked for a postponement of the case for one month until his principal witness came to town. He pleaded a set-off for L 3 17s 7d. Mr Dempsey opposed the postponement, and suggested to the defendant to pay the original claim and bring a cross-action against the plaintiff. The defendant objected to do this, and pleaded rot indebted. For the plaintiff the delivery of the goods were proved to have been made For the defence it was stated that the order sent to Bell, Rae and Co. was" not completed. The defendants ordered and were now charged for windows, doors, and ridging, which never arrived, and they suffered loss through being unable to complete a contract for which they wanted the goods. In consequence of the negligence of the plaintiffs, and the consequent loss sustained by the defendants, they considered they were not entitled to pay the amount now claimed. The Magistrate considered that it was sufficient for the plaintiffs t> have proved, as they had done, the delivery of the goods on to the dray employed by the defendants. Judgment for the plaintitFs.

11. and J. Hart v. A. J. Johnston, keeper of the Argyle Hotel and Concert liooms, Arcade.—Claim of L 6 18s Gd for a quantity of cigars and brandy Mipplicd. The defendant pleaded payment, that he had settled this account by paying the plaintiff) L' 2 and returning a portion of the brandy. The cigars, the value of which was L 5, hssd neither been paid for nor returned. The defendant stated that the reason why he did not keep the brandy was, that it was purchased for Hcnnessy's, and waa labelled with the name of that firm, but he found it to be unfit for u«e, and he had lost trade by Helling it. He believed it to be a mixture of whisky, geneva and sherry,flavored with kerosene oil. The plaintiff*, who appeared, stated that the defendant purchased the brandy at a low rate, knowing it to be an imitation, and not genuine Hennessy's brandy. The Magistrate would allow nothing lor the balance claimed to be due on the brandy; but as it had been admitted that L 5 was due for cigars, he gave judgment for the plaintiffs L 5 and costs.