MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13831, 19 February 1907, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Monday, February 18. (Before Mr 11. Y. Wkldowson, S.M.) Judgment by default, with, costs, was siven in tbo following cases:— K. Hiuisou and, Co. v. lames Wilson (Clyde), claim £11 13s 3d, balance due for goods supplied; Anglo Cycle Company v. John F. Chalmers (Kivcrtcm), claim £4 5s on account stated and agreed npon between parties, costs 18s; A. Murdoch and Co. v. C. 3. More-km (Balcluthu), claim £1 15s pel, goods supplied, costs ss; Henry Neill v. John ltobertson (Palmerston North), goods supplied, casts lls; Ellen Robertson v. Hugh M'Kmlnno (Morninglon), claim £5 Bs, rout of cottage, 'costs 23s 6d; J ane Tuyloi v. Thomas Gowie, claim JEI, board of child, costs ss; John Brown v. John ifGriith, claim £6 10s 6d, goods supplied, costs 23s Gd; S-tone, Son, and Co. v. Daniel O'iScyle (Timaru), claim £1 10s for advertising, costs 10s; Lochhead (Ltd.) v. Hobert Gemmell (Westport), claim *c 5 3s 3d, goods supplied, costs 23a 6d; samo v. David ii. Jones (Elfhnui), claim £L 15s, goods supplied, costs Ss; A. Murdoch and Co. v. Nicholas J. Jlaloney (BaJchttha), claim £5 7s 2d, balaiicc due on goods supplied, costs 24s Gd.

James London v. Kmest South (Fnlifield). —Application for an order under a judgment summons for £1G 17s &!.—Defendant did not appear, and an order was uiade that in the ovent of the amount, not being paid forthwith he should bo imprisoned for one month.

Jane Taylor v. Thomas Gowie.—Application for order under judgment summons for £2.— Defendant did not appear, and was ordered to pay the amount forthwith, in defalt throe, clays' imprisonment.

John Wilson v. Linda Jlathews (Roslyn).— Claim, fit 7s, for breach of a verbal contract in connection with the tenancy of a dwellinghouse in Ktiikorai Valley.—ill Hewitt for plaintiff, and Jlr Lemon for defendant.— After hearing evidence his "Worship held that there was not sufficient proof of contract, and recorded judgment for defendant, with costs (£1 Is). Smith, llacGrcgor, and Sinclair v. Thomas E. Shiel.—Claim, £21 9s B<], services rendered and moneys paid by plaintiffs while- acting 03 scilicitors for defendant.—ln connection with the claim it was mentioned that Mr A. C. ilanlon also claimed £19 15s 4d for solicitor's services, and Mr L. 0. Beal £15 15s for professional engineering services.—Mr A. S. Adams appeared for plaintiffs, and Jlr Burnatd (instructed by Messrs Mondy and Stephens) for defendant.—Plaintiffs' couiifol submitted that the claim aroso out of instructions given by defendant in suits for damages by two Chinese gardeners against tlio Drainage and Sewerage ±soard. The Chinese wcro tenants of defendants', and the land tenanted by, them was flooded by drainage from the board's drains on Forbury road. Defendant went to plaintiffs in May, 1904, mid gavo instructions to proceed against the Drainage Board for damages, and on several occasions afterwards consulted, and instructed plaintiffs in the matter—right up, indeed, to the period when plaintiffs retired from tho conduct of the proceedings owing to their position as solicitors for the City Corporation being likely to bo affected. Defendant was pecuniarily interested in the suit, as the Chinese were his tenant?, and were indebted to him in certain rentals, and his action throughout was that of a party to tho proceedings, and the plaintiffs never for a moment looked to the Chinese for payment of costs. When plaintiffs ceased to act in the matter defendant instructed , Mr Hanlon to act, and as a result of a. consultation with defendant Mr L. O. Beal was instructed to do soin-a profesional work.—Evidence in support of plaintiffs' claim was given by Mesais AV. C. MacGregor, A. C. Hanlon, and A. M'Donald (law clerk).—Mr Burnaid submitted that Jlr Shiel acted throughout merely as a friend and sympathiser with the Chinese, who had suffered considerable loss owing to tho flooding of their land. The Chinese asked defendant's advice in their difficulty, and he went to the solicitors with thoni and for -them, and save the solicitors clearly to understand that ho was merely a witness and not a, principal m the matter, and that those who acted would have to look to the Chinese for their costs or to tho damages secured from the- board. The rent owing by tho Chinese to defendant did not amount to £i or £s— a small amount which would, not be likely to cause a business man to become- a party to a big lawsuit.— Evidence for the defence was given by defendant and one of the Chinese, and judgment was given for plaintiffs, with costs (£1 2s).

Alexander Bell Donald v. liiomson, Briefer, and Co.— Claim. £18 9s Id, balance of freight due under charter party.—Defendants claimed a set-off (o the extent of £18 9s l<l, maclo up of claim for damages for breach of charter party, £21 ss; amount undercharged by plaintiff on freight carried for a third party, £10 4s id; and the balance for commission—llr L. T. Burnard (instructed by Atessrs Hpndv and Stephens) appeared for plaintiff, and Mr D. Ccnke for defendants.—Evidence on behalf of plaintiff was given by Captain Robertson, and at G p.m. the case was adjourned till the 2Sth insi.

—It is a curious fact that the strongest animals exist entirely on vegetable food. Tlie foroeity of tho lion, rather than his strength makes him formidable. An elephant, is a match for several lior«. an,! is a vegetarian. Tho animals with most speed avid endurance—the horse, the reindeer, and the antelope—are also vegctr. rians.