RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Inangahua Times, Volume II, Issue II, 6 May 1881, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

I—.1 — . Thtjbsday, sth Mat, 1881. (Before W. H. Kevell, Esq., E.M.) Golden Treasure v. Ocet : Settled out of Court. Same t. Same : Settled out of Court. COCHBANB V. BOSS. Mr Lynch appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Joiies for defendant. This was an action to recover balance of £10, for board and lodging. Defendant filed a set-off for a quarter share of a Lorse. William Cochrane, sworn, said : I know the defendant, who was lodging at my place for a long time, commencing in 1878, and afterwards again in 1879. He left my place at the beginning of that year. I have given him credit for all the payments he has made, including £5, being part of the price of share in a horse bought by David Cochrane from Eoss. An order which he gave me on the Res> form League for £5 was not paid, and was returned to him. Cross-examined by Mr Jones : I bad no interest in the contract at which Eoss, D, Cochrane, and James Sterling, were

working, and when he sold his share in the horse, I adyanced the moDey to DCocbrane and James Sterling. The entries in the book produced are not the original entries, but I can produce them also. Entries were made at the time. I am quite certain that I ouly got £5 of the horse money, the other £5 Eoss re« tamed. David Cochrane, said : I am a son of plaintiff, and was partners with Boss and two others in a contract. We had a horse in that firm. On Eoss leaving, Sterling and I bought Eoss' share in the horse for £10, which we requested my father to pay to defendant. We were all boarding with my father when this transaction took place. I believe my father paid him before he left, as he has never asked for the money. The evidence of the defendant, which had been taken by commission, was then read, and corroborated the main facts of William and David Cochrane's evidence, except as to the receipt of £5 from the money for a share in the borse, which defendant denies having received at the time of leaving. His Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed, with 21s costs, and professional costs, one guinea. Ceennan v. Caibns. Claim of £6 15 «, being balance doe for rent of cottage, Upper Broadway, Judgment by default, with costs, Us, M'QuiLLAN V. NIEL. | Claim of £i 10s for board and lodging. A set-off for a fly and an axe lost at plaintiff's house was put in for £1 4*, and allowed. Judgment for the balance, with costs. Joice v. Black, Mr Jones for plaintiff. Claim for £2 2s, being the value of a cross»cut saw, wrongfully claimed by defendant, and 1 6s damages for loss of time for the want of it. Plaintiff stated that be had bought the saw about 3 years ago, and had lent it to a man named Moore from whom the defendant bad taken the saw, claiming it as his own. James Moore said that be had bort rowed the, saw from plaintiff and described the saw, (be description given corroborated the description given by the plaintiff He said that he could identify it among fire hundred, and that he had had the use of it off and on for eighteen months. The saw now produced is the same. George Black, the defendant, said— That he bad bought the saw from Condy and Ewine about five years ago, and had been in u?e up till Christmas, when it was lost in Smith's paddock by his son. Afterwards fpund that Moore had it, and look possession. He described the marks on the saw, and stated that the setting has been altered, but that the saw was his, but had been lost since Chris' mis, and only found last week. He was positive that the saw was his, as be could not mistake the mark at the back of the saw, which was cut by an axe and afterwards filed out to make it work, The Court was of opinion that this was a case of mistaken identity of defendant, and ordered the saw to be returned to plaintiff with costs of Court ; one witness, 10s ; and professional costs, 21s. The Court then adjourned.