RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, ALEXANDRA. Friday.

Waikato Times, Volume XVII, Issue 1420, 9 August 1881, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT, ALEXANDRA. Friday.

[Before H. W. Northcroft, Esq., R.M.] Joseph Harris v. McCallitm. — Claim for money lent. — Mr Gresham for plaintiff, and "Mr Beale { Whitaker and Sheehan) for defendant. — The defendant and his wife sought to prove, by way of defence, that a receipt given by defendant to plaintiff, and embodying a memorandum to repay the money lent at the expiration of three months, was not what it purported to be. The contention of Mr Beale was that this £5 was actually paid by the plaintiff to the defendant for the keep of plaintiff's child. The evidence of defendant and that of his wife was at variance, and Mr Gresham declined to cross-examine Mrs McCallum, — The R.M., in giving judgment, decided that the evidence of the plaintiff, supported as it was by the document which had been written and signed by defendant, was of a reliable nature, while the t'-atimony of McCallum and his wife was u 1u 1 irustworthy. —Mr Beale claimed a nonsuit on the evidence. — Judgment for I plaintiff for £5, costs £3 Is. I McCallum v. Harris.— This was a cross-action, in which Mr Beale represented the plaintiff, and Mr Gresham the defendant. The claim was for £22 10s, less certain credits given by the plaintiff, reducing the amount to £16 103. — Mr Gresham. took a preliminary objection that the amount of £22 10s was beyond the jurisdiction of the Court. — The Magistrate concurred in this view, and dismissed the case for want of jurisdiction. — The plaintiff was ordered to pay defendant's solicitor's costs, £1 Is. JJo other business, took place.

The highest perfection of reason is to know that there is an infinity of tiwih beyond its reach.