RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

West Coast Times, Issue 1327, 23 December 1869, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Wednesday, December 22.

(Before G. G. FitzGerald, Esq., R.M.)

Sureties of the Peace. — Daniel Bouchier was charged with having, on the 21st December, threatened to knock off the ear of one Jeremiah O'Niel. The prisoner, in answer to the Magistrate, said he was drunk at the time, but pleaded drunkenness in extenuation. Prosecutor said he had never had a quarrel with the prisoner, who had threatened him without cause on the way to town. Pri -oner again threatened him. He was in bodily tear of his life from prisoner. '1 he pris mer was bound over to keep the peace, himself in £-20, and two sureties of JSIO each.

Adjourned Licensing Meeting. — His Worship said that, as there was not a quorum of Justices on the Bench,, and there bein 1 ; no chance of g ttr g a quotum, he inu^t declare ihe meeting to have lapsed. Mr Harvey said he appeared for a number of Lic-übed Victuallers to oppose the granting of these objectiona le licenses. His 'A ors ip said that, a- the meeting had lapsed, the furti.er consuls ation of the licenses would be a matte v for the County Chairman. civil cases. Laput v. Hall.— A claim for £7 3s 6d. This ac ion was one of those where a stoekeeper supplies stores to a party, and a portion having kft, the present defendant b ing then a partner, 'was sued for the goods. The plaintiff, examined by Mr South, said — I supplied the goods to Barnes and M'Kenua. They have left the district. I once sued Barnes in this Court, but did not get a verdict. Hall never got any of the goods individually. I have seen Hall when the goods were sent in. I asked Hall for money, and he said he would pay his share. M'Kenna and Barnes have been gone about ten months. I do not know where, they have gone. This was plaintiff's case. Mr South contended that his clieat should not be held liable under the circumstances. He would call J. Hall, who said — I never ordered any goods from plaintiff. Sly mates had goods from him They are gone away more than twelve months. I saw the plaintiff a few days ago, and he then said if I paid him the balance of my share he would be satisfied". He did not ask for the whole lot. Mr South said that was his case. His Worship said that there was no doubt it would be a hardship to the defendant, but, by the Act, he had no other alternative than to >.ive judgment according to the Act, which held each one of a party liable. The judgment would be for the plaintiff. Johnston and Co. v. Levy. — This was an action to recover the sum of £4 lGs. Defendant pleade 1 not indebted. Mr Johnston said the defendant had ordered some goods by his son. They were delivered at Levy's Oyster Shop. By defendant — I entered the goods in your name. I never sent the bill to Jno. Levy. I distinctly state that I never had any conversation with you on the matter. I never served Jno. Levy with the bill. J. Bocke — I am in the employment of Mr Johnston. I remember seeing the defendant and a-king him if he would pay for the cruet-stands. Defendant said, "Yes, send them orir to Mr J. Levy's." I told him there were three cruet stands. By de1 fendant — I do not recoiled taking a bill to John' Levy's for the money Mr Johnston, recalled, said there were either three or four cruets ordered. There value was £1 10s. There were four cruets ordered 1 and delivered before these, of the value of ' £] 5s each. These were returned for • cheaper ones, and the difference of value . was made up of other articles. J. Bockc, ! tecalled, said there were ciuet^ delivered . in the first instance, before the last lines • were. Defendant said he recollected I eifig surety for two cruets fo; his brother, but 1 nothing more. B> plaintiff— l never said to your collector that I would pay, but 1 that he must try and get the money out of John Levy. His Worship said he cnsidered thu claim establi hed, and judgment would be for the plaintiff for the amount claimed. The Court then adjourned until this morning.