RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Timaru Herald, Volume XL, Issue 3197, 24 December 1884, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

TIMAUTT, Tuesday, Deo. 23rd. (Before J. S. Beswick, Esq., R.M., and E. QStorickor and W. G. Rocs, Esqs., J.P.'s.) DntrNKBKNEfIS. Jolin Langmuir Smith wag rhargod witl this offcnco. There were twenty previou eonTictiona against Smith, and as he got i ■ fortnight lost time ho appeared m Court, ih Bfnch decidod to give him a month's im ; prisonment thi» time. i ' gepposro iitri»AoV. 1 ,T. Moofftrlnne wsb brought vp charged witl ■ being of unsound mind. i After consultation with Dr Drew, the pw • aiding Magistrate decided to send the tfmn t i tho Hospital for a short time. ' DIBODKTINO AN OBDEB. J The case S. Tumor v. H. J. Hughan cam up again, and after a short argument woe ac I jou?ned to January 6th.

'It CIVIL CABES. se In the following cases judgment was giv ,t- by default for the amount claimed : — to Macintyre v. J. Hall, claim £9 9s, cos as £i 10» ; same v. Burgess and Mannto Dr claim £10, costs £3 ; same v. E. Counilia d, claim £2 12s 6d, costs 18s ; same v. J. is Cook, claim £10 16s 6d, costs £1 s A. -'fc. < 0, Hamersley v. W. Wyatt, claim £2 2«, cos s- 11s i same v. Thos.. White, claim £2 12s 2c to costs 15s ; J. Macintosh v. Earndale, clai le 12s, costs 10s ; Wilkin and others v. Benj sy mm Hibbard, claim £83 4s 3d, coats £ 10 solicitor's foe £3 3s (Mr Tosswill aupeart st for plaintiffs). is W. Hughes v. R. Johnston, claim £3 f •d wages. i- Mr Hamersley for defendant. 8. Plaintiff said he had worked for plaintiff i 18 a saddler's assistant, and that he claimed & •c per week for the three weeks he had worke '.o Defendant had offered him £1 m full pa' is ment, hut ho had declined to take it. te Defendant said that plaintiff had not dor n his work properly, and that therefore ho ha a declined to pay him more than the amoui )t offered. He called C. Morrison, who wj d working for him at the same time tl is plaintiff was to prove that somo of the wor d done by plaintiff was not properly execute! a and had to be re-done. ■h Judgment was given for 30s and cost d 10s. l- D. Hcffernan v. G. Chute— Claim, £3 1J g 9d for goods, etc., supplied. d After hearing the evidence of bothpartic! d judgment was givon for £1 8s 9d, and cost i- 18s. g A. St. G. Hamersley v. Jackaon— Clain i- £17 17a lOd. s Defendant disputed the claim on th f ground that an agreement was entered mfc c by Mr Hamersley to do the work required o 0 him for so much, bu!. as defendant could no c produce the agreement, judgment was givei 1 for the amount claimed and costs, £1 Is. 1, The cases Mrs Macdonald v. G. Newtor J Mackay v. Nelson and Smith, and J. B s Stansell v. J. ABton woro adjourned til a January 6th. T In twelve cases judgment was .'confessed l and several others were withdrawn. The Court adjourned till January 6lh • 1885. }