RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

West Coast Times, Issue 93, 4 January 1866, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wednesday, January 3.

(Before Ch Q. Fitz Gomld, Esq., R.M.) Thci'o woro no criminal cases, and tho civ businoss was nfc once prococdoil with.

Campbell v Ilaro and Pratt. — This was to rccovor L 5, money overpaid on an agreoinont for tho convoyanco of somo luggage Tho plainliU' stated that in October last ho lofr. two and a quartor tons of luggago with tho defendants at Invoroargill, to bo forwarded by tho schoonor Throo Sistora, at LG por ton. Tho luggngo duly arrived, but a demand of L 8 por ton was flmdb, which plaintiff paid undor protost. In defonco it was allogcd that tho ngrcomont was to forward tho luggago at tho curront rates of freight, and that no special arrangement had boon mndo. Tho dofondant with whom tho arrangoinont hnd boon nmdp was not present, nnd tho other iv Hokitika could only stato that .tho freight demanded was at tho curront rnto nnd tho samo as was paid by tho other consignees. Vordict for tho amount claimed.

Thapporo v Power.— Mr O'Loughlin for tho defendant. Tlio plaintiff stated that ho went into defendant's house and oH'ered somo jowollory for salo. 'Amongst other things was a brooch, valuo L 3 10s, and on being shown it defendant said it was hors, aud that sho hnd had it stolon from hor somo months ago. Tho brooch was a bran now ono, and ho had

bought \t at auction from Mr Isaacs. Defendant rofusod to givo it up, and plaintiff sought tho intervention of tho police, who flrsMook possession of it but subsequently gave it up again to tho defendant. ' It wag to recover this' that this action \va3 brought. In dofenco it was alleged that tho brooch wns piircbnsod by defendant's daughter, who positively sworo to the one produced being the samo. She lent it to her sister, who lost it, nnd sho next saw it when plaintiff brought it to her irothcr's house and offered it for sale. Sho idea-

tih"ec! it by one of tho stones being loose, and by somo repairs which sho had had done to it. This evidence was corroborated in some degree by the person 'from whom Miss Power bought the brooch. He believed that the brooch produced was tho same that he sold, but be could not absolutely swear to it. I'ho oaso was aujouriiod till this day.

M'Lachlan v. Perriman —To recover L 7 10s for cartage. An applio.ii ion was made by defendants' son for an adjournment, ns his father wns away :it tho Grey, and was there dotaiuod on business . The magistrate refused the application or to allow defendant's son to appear in his stead , The caso was then gone on with, and a verdict givon for the amount claimed.

Sinithera v. Peol — This was an action to recover L 5 14s 4d. - It appeared that the plaintiff and another had purchased tho wreck of the steamer Samson, and they made arrangements with the defendant and a man named Webb to break her up, the conditions being that the latter should either havo two-thirds of tho material, cv* two-thirds of the proceeds of its sale, for their labor, the owners taking the remaining third.' Defendant sold a portion of tho wreck to the contractors for the lauuch of the John Bullook, and receive J L 8 lls for it. . Wo\)b l(}ffc Hokitika a short timo ago, and plaintiff purchased his intorest, so now ho olaimed from tho defendant

two-thirds of tho L 8 11s. Defendant put in a sot-off to moro than the amount, and the mttgistrato gavo a verdict for the defendant, plaintiff to pay to defendant the tium of Ll 15s lOd. M'Carty v. Steol. — An action to recover L 3 for porter supplied. The dofoueo was that the

defendant had never ordered the porleri Verdict for amount, Lewis v. Currio.— Mr Cumnboll for tlio dofonce. An action to rccovor L 5 10s one month's wages allogod to bo duo by tho defendant as master of tlio Oallcndor to plaintiff, who was cook on board that vossol. On tho part of the defonclunt it was not dmiicd that the wages wore due, but a set off to the amount of L 6 8a was pleaded. Yordiot for hi 12s Gd. Stovonaon v. Yato3.— To recover LlO money imid fur a section said to bo 165 feet in depth, but on taking possession plaintiff found it was only CO feet in ilopth. Tho plaintiff now sought either to got damagos or his money back, Tho defoudunt totally denied having guaranteed tho depth to be 165 feet, but tho evidence clearly showed that ho hud done so, and tho LlO was ordered to bo puid back. Tho court then adjourned.

The skclolou of a groat grandson of St. Louis baa been discovered by workmen who, under tho superintatidence of M. Havard, woro employed in lovolling tho sito of tho ancient abbey of Val Dieu at Longry, tho said great grandson of Louis IX. having then been no less a personage than Peter 11., Duke of Alenoon, surnamed Tho Loynl." Near Ins tomb woro found the bonw of his daughter, Jane of Vnloia, who