RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

Tuapeka Times, Volume VI, Issue 268, 20 March 1873, Page 5

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, LAWRENCE.

(Before Vincent Pyke, Esq., R.M.) Friday, March 14. Charges against Michael Ryan and Joseph Williams for breaches of the Goat Ordinance, were dismissed on payment of costs. T etesday, March 18. (Before Vincent Pyke, Esq., R.M.) Herbert and Co. v. SJwnnon. — Claim of L 3 9s-., goods sold and delivered. Judgment by default for amount claimed, and costs. Clark v. Draper.— Claim of L 2, for services rendered as witness. 103. had been paid into court ; not indebted pleaded as to the remainder, Mr. Copland appeared for the plaintiff ; Mr. M'Coy for defendant. Plaintiff stated that he was a dairyman, residing two miles from Lawrence ; that he had been subpeened bj Draper as a I witness in the case of Draper v. Grundy ; that he had attended the court on Feb. 18 and Feb. 22, also on March 4 and March 7, to which drites the case had been adjourned. He estimated his loss of time at 10s. for each attendance. In cross-examination, Clark stated that his expenses were nut tendered, whea La was subpoeneel, and that after the case Draper had offered him 83., which he refused to accept. This was the plaintiff's case. Mr. M'Coy called no eyidence for the defence, but contended that plaintiff's services were given as a voluntary courtesy, and that defendant was only liable for one day's expenses, as lie was not responsible for the adjournments. Judgment was reserved. J. and J. Oxenbould v. Hutcheson.— This was a claim of L2O, price of a dray ; L 5 for breach of warranty of a horse ; and L 25, value of a mare and" foal detained—in all LSO. Mr. Copland appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Mouat for defendant. Ll7 was paid into court on account of the value of the dray. Plaintiffs gave evidence to the effect that on the 20th November last it was agreed between them and defendant that they should exchange a mare and foal for a cart horse belonging tadefendants, giving L 3 to boot. The agreement was conditional upon the horse being sound and suitable, and was carried into effect a fortnight afterwards -by defendant givinsj possession of tEe horse and trains; possession of the mare and foal. Plaintiffs worked the horse, but found it unsuitable, and on the 2nd March tendered the horse back, and desired to rescind the contract, which the defendant declined to agree to. R. Andrews, farrier, stated that the horse had been fired two years previously, and he did not consider it sound, and the marks- of the firing could -bo seen by anybody. In cross-examina-tion, plaintiffs said they had been accustomed to horses for about six years. The facts were admitted by Mr. Mouat, who maintained that plaintiffs were not entitled to rescind the contract after such, a lapse of time ; that there was no fraud imputable to defendant, as the only unsoundness in the horse was pabent and obvious at the time of the agreement ; and that the plaintiffs had the benefit of the services of the horse during the wool season, and now, when the carting season was over, found it convenient to attempt to set aside the contract. He called no witnesses. Mr. Pyke considered that defendant had been sharper than plaintiffs, and that the horse was evidently unsound-, Judgment would be for plaintiffs for L 23, to be reduced to L& on redelivery of the mare and foal, with costs L 3. Is. Mr. Mouat gave nosice*of appeal.