RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Issue 3316, 5 February 1879, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday^ February 4. ' •• (Before H. McCulloch, Esq., R.M.) The adjourned case of Antonio .Bpgden, who had been remanded on a charge.-.bf larceny at Wellington, was brought, up again at 10 o'clock yesterday. Mr Finn appeared for the accused. . Sergeant Tuohy, stated that the warrant had ; arrived, and asked that the accused be remanded to. Wellington. The remand was granted. An application by John Simpson for a hawker's license, not being opposed by the . Police, was.granfced. Theie were a number of civil cases on the list, several of which were either settled or adjourned. Those heard* were as f ollojws : — Coster v. Mcintosh— a claim of £100 for trespass. Mr Harvey appeared on behalf of the plaintiff ; Mr Russell for the defendant. The charge . literally was -that defendant's sheep had trespassed on the plaintiff's land, and there was a cross-action of the same kind'faken by Mcintosh against Coster. Mr Russell asked for a remand, on the ground that the particulars in the information laid by Coster did not sufficiently specify the land in respect to which* the alleged trespass had occurred. The adjournment was granted. . Butt v. Brodrick, junior — a claim of L2O. Mr Wade appeared for the defendant. particulars of|fchis case, as stated by the plaintiff, , were that about twelve months 'ago he lent the defendant a shrimp 1 net, and that it had not been returned since. The net was produced in Court, and presented a very dilapidated appearance — in fact, there did nqt appear tq bemuch,of it left. Plaintiff valued net when he lent it at £14, but estimated , 'that he. had lost £20 by- -not having it "in his possession, as he got his living by it in the summer months, aud when . he r made application to_Mr Brodrick' for it, that gentleman told hihi the net was rotten. The net had taken him two months to make..,; On the other side, evidence "of direct contradictory, character was brought forward. The L defendant himself stated that the net was not in good oondition when he got it frdm the *; plaintiff, who admitted at the time that a log had gone through, it, and that he did not think. Mr Brodrick would find it any use. ALso, he had. lent plaintiff a boat at^the time, which had gone adrift, and was now" useless. 3Thiß, however, Butt denied,' saying he bad jiey-er _piiti bis foot, fe- fte .boat. M?

Brodrick, sen., being called, stated that he saw the net when his son firsfc got it, an.dj.ic 'was then rotten. /WitnessesJrwereCalledf by*f both sides to value the hetj'ahdf they agree! that one of the description •broducedvjwo'uld be worth when new from -£14rtQi £10; f His Worship, in giving judgment,. Said? ho 7 satisfactory evidence had been^igiyeui ;asi|o«the/« Rvalue of tbe net when ifc w^jient7an&fiiiere-4 was some difficulty in arrivihg at a just^bi- * "mate as to what was then worth. He gSye^-ji judgment or 42s and costs. l

/rj^^Mfl^^^eegan-^tclaini fof^£4^ivM^s amount due ott goods sold and" delivered; '."Mr" Matthews.rfoijrthe plaintiff;.- The,;Cpurt, after hearirigi,/?yidisnee, ;\ggv_ ; -jiidgm.en't Ifbr £3 lOs 9d— that isi'f or the amount claimed, with-out-the-interestadded..; A.Aaj. 7:7^ .-,.' "t^fpfpif^^ journed. •-.. 77- : ■'^AAjAiAiiA -.7 f..-- '-..a.:;.