RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Westport Times, Volume V, Issue 834, 8 July 1871, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE COURT.

Fbiday, Juxt 7. (Before J. Giles, Esq.,R.M.) Ann Connolly appeared to answer to the information of Peter Rafferty, charging her, under the Vagrant Act, with the use of obscene and abusive language. < The hearing of the case was adjourned until the following morning for the production of additional evidence. Renewals of publican's licenses were granted to Arthur LuiF, R. J. Long, Edmond Roche, and a new license was granted to Alex. M'lntosh for the National Hotel, Gladstone street. Accommodation licenses were granted to Christian Mindennan, Donald Ross, Joseph Logue, and David Wallace. CIVIL CASES. Excelsior Quartz Mining Company (Registered) v. Walter Lavette.—This was an action to recover the sum of of £B, due to the company by the defendant for calls upon shares. Mr Pitt, who appeared for the defendant, pleaded not indebted. David Leslie appeared on behalf of the company, and gave the following evidence":—l am the legal manager of the Excelsior Quartz Mining Company (Registered), and I produce evidence of the company having been duly registered. Walter Lavette, the defendant, applied for shares in the Excelsior Company; two shares were allotted him,and he has paid the deposit on them, as also the first call of £l per share. There have been four calls since, of £1 per share on the dates stated in the bill of particulars. The calls were advertised, and I produce the papers containing the notices. I have called upon the defendant for payment of these calls. By Mr Pitt: The defendant did not at first decline to pay the calls, but put the matter off. Subsequently he stated that he did not desire to have anything further to do with the shares. There is no deed of association in the company. Mr Pitt claimed a non-suit on the grounds that there was no proof that the defendant was a shareholder, nor that the calls were lawful calls. His Worship was of opinion that the "proof on these matters was altogether insufficient. The objections raised by the defendant might have beeen foreseen, and evidence should have been produced to establish every step taken by the Company or the directors. The records could, no doubt, be easily produced, and should have been forthcoming. He did not consider the objections were'technical ones as the evidence brought forward to establish the claim was too meagre. The complainants would be nonsuited with costs of Court and one guinea counsels costs. Excelsior Quartz Mining Company, (Registered) v. James Simpson—This was also a claim for £8 for calls. The circumstances of this case being precisely similar to the previous one, Mr. Leslie accepted a non-suit with costs.