RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Inangahua Times, Volume II, Issue II, 10 December 1880, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Thursday, Dbcbmbeb 11, 1880. (Before W. H. Eevell, Esq , R.M.) Brandt v. Isacson — Claim for £6 5s for goods supplied. Judgment by default for the amount claimed with costs. UNIOK COMPANY T. JOHN DlOf. This was a claim for £18 15* for calls due. Mr Lynch for plaintiffs. This case was adjourned last Court for (be e? ideuce of tbo manager, who was called, and gare the following evidence : John JVl'Craffiu ; J am still the manager of the Union Company, my successor not baring been appointed. I produce the Bhare«register. J. Dick's name appears for 376 shares. The gOth call was made on June 23th of Is per sbara. I produce newspaden containing notices of call. This call was demanded from Disk's at* torney, but refuse Iby him. The c«itifi« cate of incorporation has been lost. Cross-examined by defend cot j t am not gazetted as manager, but produce the re* solution of my appointment. I presented Mr Aikett, your attorney, with notice of call. He puid a former call for you. John D.ck : I was a shareholder in the Union Company, I dispute having paid the 19th cali, and am therefore supposed to bare forfeited my shares. The minutes of i he meeting making the calls have not been confirmed. Mr MGaffi i not having been gazetted, he cannot sue for calls for (he company. John M'G-dffin re-called, said that the minutes could not be confirmed, as the (•hairmfln ceased to continue a chairman after tie meeting. The minu'es were not mn&'med by the signature of the chairnun, but were otherwise confirmed. Two calls have been made and paid by defen dant and .Mr Aiksn after he left notice at the office of transferring his shares to the company. Mr Aiken told me that he was acting for the defendant iv bis absence, and paid one call. James Aiken : I know defendant, and recollect; his leaving for Home. He ap* pointed me bis agent, and empowered me to p;«y calls for him, but do not rtmem» ber to what extent my authority extended. The Court held that although the manager had neglected to gazette bis ap« poiutmeot, such omission would not invalidate the claim of tie company lor calls. Judgment would, therefore, be be entered up (or the amount claimed with costs. Ibvino v. Pbentipb. An action lor the recovery of damages o ll>e annual of £10, for laming a cow

in the custody of plaintiff Belonging to SundefJand, I know Prentice. I own sorrte cattle. Oa 10th November, I *7as toj^thaMhe defendant had been throwin? stones at the cuttle. Oa inspection I found that the fore-lea of one cow was broken above the knee joint. The v<jlue of the animal was £10. Since (he injury to the cowl hare been offered £2 for ber. Andrew Patten . I am working in the Wealth of Nations. I recollect seeiog Prentice's son driving oat cattle snd throwing stones at them, and al-o saw defendant hit the cattle with stones ; a few minutes afterwards I found the cows leg broken. She had only moved a eonple of yards after being bit. Robert Tweedy : I atn a blacksmith and farrier. I know the parties to this suit, and on being called by plaintiff to examine the cow found ber leg broken below the knuckle joint, which I consider having been caused by force. John Prentice denied having thrown stones at (be cow as mentioned, and that he thinks it probable that the injury was done by her jumping a fence and race. Judgment for tbe amount of £10, the vaiue of the cow. The. cow was ordered to be destroyed, unless she shotrs signs of recovery. National Bane v. Hb<lop. A material witness for defendant not having been served with subpoena to attend, the case was farther sdj >uroed till next sitting of tbe Court, A little girl, the daughter of Annie Smith, was brought np under the " ft eglected Children's Ordinance," and wa« ordered to be sent to the Nelson Orphan Asylum. Court adjourned.