MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 10033, 26 April 1894, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

WbdSeSdati April 25: ' (Before Mr £ k (W; S.Mij, ~ . Judgment was given for the plaintiff.), with costs, ifa the following Undefended cases:—A, Tapper and Co.(for whpm Mr Solomon appeared) v. Margaret Duma's (Chfistchurch), claim £9 12s fid; for goods supplied j, W. G. Neill v, Ah Wye (Cbnroy'a „ Gully), cjaim £6 its 3d, on a dishonoured cheque; Mm* v. John Brutt Hutchison (Clinton), £21 7s--7d on a dishonoured promissory note; I. Hoynian and Co. (for whom Mr A. S. Adams appeared) v. Blackmoro and Harrop (Makiklhi), claim £6 2a lid, for goods supplied; George William Gough (for whom Mr W. alacgregorappeared) v. Gershani Bowman, claim £8 4s, on a dishonoured cheque ; Peter Aitken (for whom Mr Wilkinson appeared) v. J. White (Oamaru), claim £4 ISs, for clothes supplied; same v. Charles Jacobson (Oamaru), claim £3 IBs, for clothes supplied. Robeit Baxter v. John Black.—Claim £1 :IO.«, on a judgment Bummonn.—Sir W. MaCftregor appeared for the plaintiff; and after evidence bad been, given by the defendant the case was dismissed, as it had not been proved that defendant had means to satisfy the judgment. The Globe Newspapar Publishing Company (Limited) v. Andrew Mowat Gow (Palmerston).— Claim X 5. for application money and calls due on shares.—Mr A. 8. Adams appeared for the platotiff company, and Mr Hanlon for the defendant.—This case was adjourned from Friday la3t. — The defendant now gave evidence and stated that he had never signed an application for shares in the Globe Newspaper Company. The form produced with his name attached was not signed by him, but by Peter Barkman, the person who asked him to take chares.—Defendant was asked to write his name, and after he had done bo, his Worship said he thought the signature on tbe form of application and that just written by tbe defendant were the same, and gave judgment for the amount claiiiied, with costs (.£'3 ss). John Gore v. John Cliilcott.—lri this case the plaintiff sued the defeudant lor negligently overdriving a hone oh the 21th of March whereby the animal was killed; and also for failing, pursuant to a contract,of hiring, to return the said horse uninjured to the plaintiff. Wherefor the plaintiff claimed £20 the value of the hoi Be, and £5 damage for loss of the use of it, and for the expenses of an examination of the body, and of burying it, and other charges arising out of the defendant's acts—Mr F. it. Chapman appeared for- the plaintiff, and Mr Solomon for the defendant.—From the evidence it appeared that the defendant hired a horse and buggy from plaintiff, who stated that defendant informed him when getting the hone that he wanted to go to Mosgiel. Before taking the horse from plaintiffs stables defendant signed a form Undertaking to be responsible for any damage to the animal from whatever cause occasioned, Defendant stated that he told the plaintiff that he was going beyond Mosgiel, but he went a considerable distance beyond that place, and on the return journey to town the horse dropped down dead. The animal, according to defendant's evidence, was driven slowly both going out of town and returning home, and this evidence was corroborated by two young ladies who were with defendant on the day in question. —His 'Worship having heard the evidence said ho was satisfied that the charge of overdriving the horse, in tbe sense of driving it quickly, had not been sustained, and after areument between learned counsel as to defendant* liability under the contract signed by him, judgment was reserved.