MAGISTERIAL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 9213, 16 April 1908, Page 3

MAGISTERIAL.

CHRISTCHURCH. Thursday, Amu 16. (Before Mr "VV. J. Neate, J.P., and Mr J. H. Stringer, J.P.) Drunkenness. — Two first offenders for drunkenness were each fined 5s and costs, in default twenty-four hours' imprisonment. Obscene Language. — Michael Sheehan (Mr Donnelly) pleaded guilty to having been drunk ancl to having used obscene language in a public place. Mr Donnelly stated that his client was not very well yesterday and took a little port wine and brandy, which affected his head. He went home, and after having an argument with his wife used the words complained of. The Bench imposed a fine of 20s and costs for using obscene language, and 5s and costs tor drunkenness. Assault. — Allan James Dix was charged with having been drunk and with having unlawfully assaulted William John Randall. Mr Donnelly appeared for defendant, who pleaded guilty. He asked the Bench to deal with defendant leniently. Randalletated that defendant visited his shop last evening and demanded oysters. Witness informed him oysters were '•'off," and requested him to leave. Defendant thereupon struck him in the face. The Bench inflicted a fine of 6s and costs for drunkenness and 10s and costs for the assault. Theft. — Edward Bramley (Mr Donnelly) was fined 20s and costs for having stolen two gas stoves and a sewing machine, valued at £5, the property of William Clark. The articles were ordered to be returned to Clark. t Remanded. — William Morris (Mr Donnelly) was remanded to Thursday on a charge of having carnally known a girl under sixteen years of age. Bail was allowed, the accused in £50 and two sureties of £50 each. Assault. — Frederick Jackson was charged with having indecently assaulted a? female. After hearing the evidence the Bench decided to allow the charge to be reduced to common assault, and sentenoed acoused to fourteen days' imprisonment. (Before Mr H. W. Bishop, S.M.) Judgment by Default. — In eaoh of the following cases judgment with costs was entered for the plaintiff by default : — Merchants and Traders' Agency (assignee of Lewis and Anderson) v. E. Tisch, £4 18s lid; Bowron Bros, and Co., Ltd., v. James Flynn, £21 17s lid; F. Gulliver (Mr Eraser) v. G. T. Caddy, £80 18s 3d ; A. Bell (Mr Rowe) v. M. Ell, £5 ; E. M'Donald (Mr Fraser) v. F. Mills, £2 15s: same v. W. Large, £2 10s j same v. W. T. Maher, £3 15s; Craddock, Orr and Co., Ltd., v. Frederick W. Di'ummond, 10s 3d; (I Pannell and 00. v. George Rewai, £6 6s 6d; T. F. Jago and Annie Jago •7. C. R. Paterson, £4 ss. Judgment Sttmmons Case. —A. Werner and Co. (M r Mosley) asked for an order against W. Burns on an unsatisfied judgment for £26 6s 3d. The .debtor did not appear and was ordered to pay the amount, in default one month's imprisonment. — No orders were made \A the judgment summons cases: H. M'Fedries (Mr Rowe) v. R. Cowan, £2 3s. Bd: Andrew Lees (Mr Rowe) v. H. C. Dowle, £59 Is 8d; Tranter and sons (Mt Cunningham) v. J. H. Purbrook, £9 6s 6d. Saddle Troubles. — Harry Willis (Mr Wilding) claimed £26 14s 3d from T. Cress and Son (Mr Russell) as money short paid on a bill of exchange given by the defendant to the plaintiff in payment for a shipment of saddles. The case rested on the correspondence that passed between the two parties. The defence was that the defendant" in January, 1906, ordered saddles from the plaintiff at 55 per cent off cata~ logue prices. In July, 1906, he sent a supplementary order which was accompanied by a letter stating that the terms should be 55 per cent discount. The saddles -sent to mm were 6addleis included Tn the catalogue. Th© 56 per cent was the amount short paid. The plaintiff's case was that the supplementary order was for saddles' not included in the plaintiff's catalogue, and the 55 per cent was to have been oßarged on only catalogue prices. The plaintiff could fix his own price. Judgment was reserved. ■ A Steel Casting.— ln Waddell and Sons (Mr Russell) v Anderson's, Limited (Mr Wilding), the plaintiff claimed £67 15s 8d for work done in connection with a steel casting. The plaintiff's case was that the defendant had instructed them to make the casting, and it was understood that in the event of failure of the work the money was still to have been paid, because the plaintiffs' plant was not large enough to do the work, and they only "took it on under those conditions. The casting was made, and sent to Anderson's foundry at Lyfctelton, where it was turned and some "blow" holes found in it. The casting was returned to Waddell' s, and there the " blow " holes were filled, making it as good as if there had been no holes. The casting was accepted by Anderson's, who sent it to Auckland, but it was condemned there, and the defendant refused to pay for it. The defendant said that the order was given subject to conditions embodied in a letter to Waddell's. The conditions were that the casting should be reasonably free from " blow >J holes, and should have a good surface on every side. Mr Russell submitted that the defendants had accepted delivery of the casting, and by this they ■were estopped from disputing their liability. Judgment was for the plaintiffs, with costs.