RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 9331, 23 January 1892, Page 5 (Supplement)

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Friday, Januauy 22. (Before Mr E. H. Carew, R.M.)

R. Jamieson and Co. v. W. A. Hobbs (Timaru).

—Claim L 5 7s Bd, on a dishonoured promissory note. —Judgment was given for the plaintiff for

ic amount claimed, with costs, by default.

James Fox y. Alex. Palmer.—Claim LI!) 0s 3d, for coal supplied.—Mr D. 1). Macdonald appeared for plaintiff, and Mr S. Solomon for defendant — Mr Macdonald stated that the paint in dispute was whether certain coal supplied on September ord and October 2nd should be charged at the price of LI 12s (id per ton or LI Ss per ton. The

last iteiri on the bill was a charge of 28s, and defendant paid that amount. The plaintiff

alleged that the coal supplied on the two first occasions was unscreened, and the plaintiff held that it was. The sum of Ll7 2s 3d was paid into court. —Plaintiff was then called and gave evidence as to having supplied the defendant with the coal. Mr Palmer tultl him that another party had offered to supply the same kind of coal at 283. Witness replied that he supposed he would have to fall in with the price, at any rate they would not fall out. Witness further stated that his men had been instructed to send screened coal, and lie believed that it was screened coal.- Witness went down in the rellar and saw the coal. It was soft coal, and had been shot down about seven feet. The price of the coal was 32s (id. previous to November, and at the beginning of that month witness reduced the coal to 28s. Unscreened coal was ■is a ton less.—John Gibb (yardman), John Dcclicvty

(carter), and Walter Miller (clerk), in the employ of the plaintiff, gave evidence that the coal supplied to Mr Palmer was screened coal. —Mr Solomon then opened the case for the defence, and stated that, as his Worship no doubt was aware, there was a good deal more involved in the case than the amount stated in the claim, Mr Palmer having been sup plied with unscreened coal instead of screened for about two years. The defence was that the coal had not been screened, that was it bad not been freed from dross and dust.—Alexander Palmer,

licensee of Wain's Hotel, cave evidence that he had always ordered screened coal, but unscreened had been sent. Mr Griffon, of the Grey Valley Company, saw the coal, and having passed some remarks about it, witness complained to Mr Miller that the coal had not been screened. Mr Miller said that it was not screened* and stated that it must have been sent by mistake.—Nicholas Ciriffen, traveller for tho Grey Valley Coal Company, also gave evidence.—FoterM'Ardle, manager vi the Grey Valley Company, deposed that coal could bo imperfectly screened, that is, put over a screen without removing the dross. The object of the screening was to get rid of the dross.—Crossexamined : If a person handled the coal a good deal it would cause dross.—James Brown, porter at Wain's Hotel, said he supplied the coal to the kitchen. He took it from the cellar. The coal .■supplied by Captain Fox during the past three months had not been screened at all. There was as much dross as there was coal.—Cross-examined; They had a good deal of unscreened coal. He did not know where it came from. He knew where it came from during the past five or six months. Anybody could tell the coal was not screened. Mr Palmer was supposed to be buying screened coal. He did not know whether Mr Palmer was paying for screened or unscreened coal. . Mr Palmer did not tell witness what sort of coal it was. On one occasion he spoke to witness about the coal, the cook having made complaints about it.—William Robins, head cook at Wain's Hotel, said that he had been cooking for other hotels besides Wain's. The coal supplied at the latter place during the past few months contained dross. The coal on the top did not contain dross, but it took four days to get to the dross. The coal would not burn in a Leinington range and had to be burnt in other fireplaces to get rid of it. MiMiller went into the cellar and looked at the coal and he said it was not screened coal. He asked witness if that was the usual way in which he got the coal, and the reply was in the affirmative. He .saw Mr Miller on a subsequent occasion—one day last week— andhe mentioned that the coal had been badly screened. —Cross-examined : Witness, had bsen working at the City Hotel, but he never saw so much rubbish in the coal there as was in the coal at Wain's Hotel. He knew Ca7)tain Fox sup, plied the City Hotel with coal.—Henry Scltancr, second cook at Wain's Hotel gave evidence that the coal supplied at that place was not screened coal. He heard Mr Miller say something about the coal not being screened.—After further evidence, judgment was gived for LI 6<*, and costs.

— A plot for kidnapping the children of the millionaire Mr George Gould has been discovered in America. The children have to be accompanied by detectives whenever they venture out. The same gang contemplated the kidnapping of the children of several other New York millionaires.

j-i-^v r. A 1* *** **'- -"- >- *** -^ A** lZ '*- ***