RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 9959, 30 January 1894, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Monday, January 29. ■ ;-.■■■■ ■■■■"•'•' ■ (Before Mr E. H. Carew, R.M.) :-' Judgment was given by default for the plaintiffs, with costs, in the following undefended cases:—R. Jamieson and Co. v. John 0. Arbuckle (Lawrence), claim £16 2s 9d, on a dishonoured cheque; Simon Bros. v. William. Dickey (Bannockburn), claim £1 19 a Sd, balance due for goods supplied (Mr Calvert appeared for the plaintiffs); same v. Robert M'Cunn (Beaumont), claim £2 Os 3d, for goods supplied (Mr Calvert for the plaintiffs); G. A. Smyth v. Robert Ferguson (Lawrence), claim £1 19s 9d, balance due for goods supplied (Mf Sim for the plaintiff); Bame v. Alexander Joss (Queenstown), claim £5, for cash lent (Mr Sim for the plaintiff); M'Gavin and Co. v. Patrick Talty (Nenthorn), claim £3 9s, balance due for ale supplied (MrMacdonald for plaintiff); G. Purchea v. Henry Price, claim £5 Ss 9d, for goods supplied (Mr Wilkinson for the plaintiff); H. K. Shaddock v. Daniel M. Hanna (Palmerston North), claim ;£55 IBs 4d, balance due for ranges supplied; K. F. Lawrence v. Alexander IV Logan (Wellington), claim £34 3s 4d, on a dishonoured promissory note (Mr Solomon for the plaintiff)." Frankton Beach Dredging Company, Limited (in liquidation), v. James Couston.—Claim .£2O, for calls alleged to be due.—Mr Joel appeared on behalf of the plaintiff company, and; Mr Fraser for the defendant.—Mr Fraser asked for an i adjournment in order that he might make application to the Supreme Court to relieve the defendant of liability on 100 shares with which.he was charged.—After some discussion.'Mr Fraser stating that the defendant was willing to pay £7 10a, which he admitted to be due, an adjournment for n month was granted. AVilliam Ashton (plasterer) and Francis Foster (plumber) v. Robert James.—This was an application under "The Contractors' and Workmen's Lien Act 1892" by the plaintiffs, to whom the. defendant was alleged to owe £1012s and £B lla 7J4 respectively, for a Hen on the land in connection with which their work had been doneallotment 11, block XXIII, township of St. Kilda— which was owned by the defendant and mortgaged by him during the present month to the trustees of the Leith Lodge, 1.0.0. fc\—Mr Fraser, who appeared for the plaintiffs, said the district land registrar had rejected the lien on technical grounds. The act was a perfect disgrace to the draughtsman, and he would not worry his Worship with a long argument, but as the lien had been rejected, would withdraw the proceedings.—Mr A. S. Adams, on behalf of Jharles Leith, asked that the claim be cancelled.— Mr i'rater: I withdraw the proceedings.—Mr Adams pointed out that under the act any person alleging himself to be prejudicially affected by any claim or lien might apply to the court to have the claim cancelled, lie agreed with his learned friend that the act was a disgrace to whoever drew it.—Hia Worship said that the dsfenant not appearing, and the plaintiffs having withdrawn the proceedings, the case was struck out.— Mr Adams asked that under section 41 of the act the claim bo cancelled. Ho referred his Worship q the provisions of the act upon which he based his applipation, but added that there was one point which might dispose of the whole question : that being that Robert James was not the owner of the land at the time tho Hen was lodged. That involved a question of title.—His Worship had no-objection to say that bo far as the proceedidrs before him that day went he saw nothing at all to prejudicially affect the title of Mr Adams's client. ■

— Many shrewd and uarefal foreigners, including rulers and royalties, Lave pnt large Bums nway in Euglish securities iv ease of a rainy day. Victor Hujjo has the wholo of bis vast fortune invested in Knglaad, and so has President Grevy.