MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 24, 10 June 1868, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

CHRIHTCHUUCII, TOMSDAT, JCNIS 0. (Boforo 0. 0. Bowon, Esq,, H.M., and 0. tt, Bhikiston, Esq.) oiviiv OASiep. , W. 11. Hauding v. TitnLMAVßN.— Claim of £4 17s 2d, for Rd bushels of wheat, delivered according to samplo, Plaintiff had sold 100 bushels of wheat to defendant at Is lod per bushel, and had delivered 03 bushels, which gafc perfect satisfaction. Dofondant had given him a written memorandum of the sa ib, signing it " George Troloavon," and not mentioning that tho purchaso was on behalf of anyone else. Defendant said he hud purchased tho wheat for his father, and not on his own account. Ho purehasod it in his father's storo, whioh ho was manngtng at the timo, Ho noYcr transacted any business on his own account, 110 admitted writing tlio memorandum of sale produced, hut had written many similar ones ln buying grain on hiij father's hohalf, without signing them other than with his own name His father hiid become bankrupt shortly after the purchase of the grain from plaintiff!, who ought to send, iv his claim to tho citato. Plnintiti: recalled, sald'Jib'' had 'hover for a moment understood that the transaction was made on behalf of defendant's father, but on hh own account, Ills , Worship said it face of this '-'Statement tho bench could noi go boyonil tho memorandum of salo, whiol was most oxpliolt as to, tho purchase bolnp on jdofondnnt's ■ own account, Defendant might have purchased tho wheat for hh father, hut tho memorandum ought to hay. said so, and failing that, judgment could noi othorwlso than bo givon for plaintiff for full nmoun-b nnd costs, Jndgmcntwas given for full amount and coslH In the following casosi- -City Council v 0, Morgan, £1 Bbj A. Exori-v. A. M'Donald, £1 ia (Id) Cox and Halcor v. W. lf. FrankoJ Xlo:,*Js Od) 11. 33. Johnstono v. Thomas' *Mllll< gnn,' £1 6 10hi Buporintondont r, M'Tlgno, 4110) l<), Hcooo v, Hubert Ashworth, £<J 10* lld f Cox and Babcr v. Hobort Minister, £1 MB). Name v. Henry Plpor, XlO 17s 2d| Wood Brothers v. William Logorwood, £!» 4* j Sauio v, G. I'opo, iii 7s Od t 'Sumo v. Hubert Cry or, XI I 2s j Hnmo v, W, Donald, £2 Mhi Od j C, J, Foster v, James Clark, £3 Hs; James Vickers v, Hastings Baker, £2 lls 8d } W. Mtrango and Co. v. Mnrtln Warren, Xl 7 f 8. Earley v. It. Ailren, £15 18s, Id. In tho oaso of J. Booker v. James Gatherer, claim of £10 12s, judgment was given for plaintiff for £2 and costs, and In that of A, McDonald v. Thomas Phillips, 8s (Id, ,|u igmeiit was givon for tho defendant with costs. Tins Day, (Before 0. 0 Bowon, Esq,, tt.M.) There woro no criminal cases to-duy. OIVIL CASKS. VicicititT v, Dickson,— £lo rent, Judgmont for full amount and costs, f_, Wawciui v, IfAUMNa.— £l6 10s rent. Judgment for full amount aud costs, .p ■ • llawki.4 and Stuouts v, Andhrbon,— £41 on Bd, goods supplied. . Judgment for amount nnd costs. Loiti) J'iYTTMT/roN v, Hami'ton,— jClO rent, Judgment for amount and costs, !) Kf.AMAttM v, Qr.ANVtr.i.u,— £2l for passage) j money, and hoard and lodging. ,Mr Naldor for tho plalntill 1 , .Mr fcilnter for do fondant. Judgment for £1 1 und coats, ]toi».KNKr_AU v, IJl_ltl.l_.lm,— £2 lOs, Judgment fpr amount and costs, Piwri' v, BIWJ.INKH— £33 2« fld,'*' Judgment loc amount and costs. Quay v, Howlanii.^X.-D, valuo of mare illegally sold by dofondant, Tho ciisb, was head, on a former Mlay,' and tho evidence report* d, His Worship, gave 'Judgment for £!_3 and costs, to bo enforced If the marc Is not returned to tho plaintiff before tho 13th of JunCf