RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Timaru Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 3422, 16 September 1885, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

TTMARtT— Tobsdat, Skpthmi)]!!! 15th. (Before J. S. Jleswick, Ksq., R.M., nnd Edward Acton, Kh,j., J.P.) CHILD UF.BKUTION. Alfred Bloomfleld wan charged by Aimio Gardnor with deserting her illegitimate child ngod eight, months. Mr Hamcrsley appeared for complainant, and Mr Lynch lor Illoomnold. After Annie Gardner kud given mmo ovidenco Mr Lynch took abjection to tho information. After somo argument Mr Ilamornloy aimmdod tho information, and chargod Bloomfield with failing to support his illegitimato child. At tho suggestion of tho Bench tho caso was then adjourned till Monday next to allow tho parti™ time to try ami como to noluo agrecmont on tho mutter. CIVIL CASES. William Collins t. Elias Copp — Claim £5 18s. Mr Lynch appeared for plaintiff. There wns no appearance of dofondant, and after plaintiff had proved his claim judgmont was given for amount and posts £1 14s. P. Macintyro v. James Taylor — Clnim £3 3s. Defendant appeared, and produced roceipt, but Doctor Macintyro showed that it dealt with an account other than tho ono he

was now suing for. In reply to tho Bench defendant admitted that he had not paid the three guineas. Judgment was given for the amount claimed and costs, Ob. Peacock and Geaney v. John Barclay — Claim £20 damages. Mr M. J. Lynch for plaintiff ; Mr C. T. H. Perry for defendant. This case was partly heard on Thursday last. Plaiutiffs' contentions wero that on the 7th July last defendant agreed to sell and deliver to them before the 28th July 140 shcop at the rate of 2d per lb, twenty of the sheep to be weighed and the average weight thus ascertained. On the 10th July 75 sheep were delivered, and ten of them were weighed next day, the average being GSilb, at 2d per lb equal to lls 5d per sheep. On the 2Sth July the balance of the sheep were demanded, but defendant refused to givo them up, and m consequence of this plaintiffs had had to purchase sheep at market prices, and had incurred much expense and trouble, for which they claimed the amount stated. The defence was, shortly, that Barclay never arranged to Bell 140 sheep. He only agreed to sell 70 more or less, from ten of which an average weight was to be struck. Mr Perry now called Annie Barclay (wife of defendant) and a lad named F. Cosmore, who were present when defendant arranged tho sale, and whose evidence was m the main corroborative of that given by Barclay. After Mr Lynch had called rebuttal evidence on one point, counsel addressed tho Court at length. Tho Bench gavo judgment for £8 nnd costs, viz., Court costs, £1 lls ; witnesses' fees, £1 Is ; and solicitor's fees, £2 2s. J. Smith v. James While-Claim £15. Mr Lynch for plaintiff ; Mr Hamersloy for defendant. In this case plaintiff, executor of David Grainger, deceased, sought to recover goods or their value, which wero left ut defendant's house on the death of Grainger, and £4 danir.ges. After the case had been opened, the Bench advised counsel to consent to an adjournment of it for the purpose of having it arranged out of Court, as it was shown that defi-ndant was quite willing to give up tho goods as soon as accounts wero settled between them. The usual luncheon adjournment then took place, and on resuming, the Bench gave judgment for £2, tho unsold portion of the goods to be returned. Same v. S. Mills— Claim 14s. Judgment for plaintiff for 10s and costs. E. i J . Sealev v. Levels Road Board— Claim £1 S*. Mr Tosswill for the plaintiff ; Mr Raymond for the defendant. The particulars of this clnim set out that plaintiff had sustained damages to the amount claimed through the defendant causing or permitting certain posts oi obstructions to remain or be placed on a certain road known as the Three-Mile Bush road, such road being under the control and within the boundaries of the district of the Levels Road Board. After evidence for the plaintiff had been given, Mr Raymond submitted that the plaintiff be nonsuited. The defendant had, he said, not beon properly described m the smnmons. The Road Board was only, as it were, an executive body, and could not be sued ; it was only a corporation that could be sued, which m this case meant the inhabitants of the road district. After some further argument between counsel, His Worship nonsuited the plaintiff. Tho Court then rose.