MAGISTERIAL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 4682, 2 May 1883, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

OHBISTCHUBOH. This Dat. (Before B. Beetham, Esq., 8.M.) DBUNKENNKag. — A man not previously convicted, who "expeoted" ho had been drunk on the Lincoln road the day previou*, was fined 6s. — George Brown, charged with drunkenness, denied the accusation, and obtainod a remand to thefollowing day to enable him to obtain the aid of a solicitor.— Johanna Gallagher, an habitual drunkard, was fined £2, or in default 60 hours' imprisonment. CIVIL CASES. MiacBiLANBOUS. — The cases of Garrick and Oowiishaw v. Gibson, and Kelsey '[-.ros. v. M'Grath, were adjourned to May 9.— Smith v. Gallant, claim £26 10s, balance due on timber, &c, delivored. This caso had beon frequently adjourned, for various reasons, and now thero was no appearance of defendant. Mr M'Connell, for plaintiff, obtained a judgment with costs. — Liddlo v. Kinley, olaim £51 18s, balanco of commission duo for sale of land. Mr M'Connel for plaintiff; Mr Martin for dofendant. Plaintiff stotod that through his agenoy defondant had effected tho sale of 83 acres of land at Ohoka to a Mr Waites onbohalf of defendant at £30 per acre. Plaintiff's wifo and the purchaser of the land gave corroborativo evidence. The charge made was in accordance with Chamber of Oommerce ratos. Plaintiff had filed a declaration of insolvency three years ago, and had never received his dißoharge, but thiß particular commission had been made over to him by the Trustee. Defendant, who was partially corroborated by his wife, asserted that he had promised plaintiff only £10 for finding a purchaser, and had paid hire, this amount. Mr Martin objected, that as an uncertificated bankrupt the j deed of assignment was defective, as being made betweon the trustee in his own name, j and not as trustee, and further, that if the assignment were good the trustee should bo joined with the plaintiff in the action. Mr M'Connel quoted authorities to show that the plaintiff had a porlecb right to sue for work and labour done during the bankruptcy if the Itrusteo did not interfere. His Worship would leave it optional for Mr Martin to I appeal on the law of the case. Ab to the facts, it wbb clear that the land had been put in the plaintiff's hands for sale by dofendant, and that through the former a purchaser was found. In the orduary course of business, plaintiff would bo eMitlod to tho amount ho claimed, and it was for the other sido to show that this courso had been doported from. This had not boon done, as tho testimony was divided on the point, and therefore judgment would be for the plaintiff with costs.