Skip to Content

Colonial Cases

Minor cases 1870

 

The North-China Herald, 4 January 1870

SUMMARY OF NEWS.

We notice that Mr. F. J. Barnard has bought a successful action for assault against Mr. Ewart, at Yokohama.  Defendant pleaded provocation of violent language used towards him during a case in Court; but was sentenced to three weeks imprisonment, without the alternative of a fine.

 

The North-China Herald, 4 January 1870

LAW REPORTS.

POLICE COURT.

Before G. JAMIESON, Esq.

30th December, 1869.

ASSAM v. D. MUIRHEAD.

Claim $20 wages due.

Defendant stated he had stopped one month's wages from plaintiff, on account of sundry articles being missing from premises; he had reason to believe plaintiff had stolen a revolver, and for that had stopped his pay.  The balance claimed he did not think could be admitted, as plaintiff had neglected his work very much.

To pay $13 and costs.

 

The North-China Herald, 11 January 1870.

LAW REPORTS.

BANKRUPTCY COURT.

January 10.

Before C. W. GOODWIN, Esq., Registrar.

In re BARNES DALLAS.

First meeting of creditors.

The bankrupt surrendered himself, but no creditors appeared.

The Court then appointed the meeting for the last examination for Saturday the 15th February.

 

The North-China Herald, 22 March 1870

PORTUGUESE CONSULAR COURT.

March 16th, 1870.

Before H. P. HANSEN, Esq.

MUNICIPAL COUNCIL v. PEREIRA.

Claim for Tls. 25.52 taxes due.

   The defendant objected that the house tax (Tls. 19,25) was based on a sum 150 per cent in excess of his rent; and that the claim for lighting rate was unfair, as there was no lamp near his house.

   G. Roggers, tax Collector, explained that, had defendant claimed exemption from lighting rate, it would have been granted; the tax was included in all debit notes, as a formality; but was never claimed  from persons living more than 150 yards from nearest lamp.  The house tax s based on estimated, not on actual rent.

   The Consul General gave judgment for the sum claimed, less Tls. 6.27 for lighting rate.

 

The North-China Herald, 5 May 1870

IN BANKRUPTCY.

May 3rd, 1870.

Before C. W. GOODWIN, Esq.

Re BARNES DALLAS.

This was a first dividend meeting.

Mr. Michie on behalf of Chapman, King & Co., proved a debt of Tls. 2,000.

The official assignee then handed in a statement of accounts, showing that about Tls. 3,700 had been collected and about 500 more might be expected.  A dividend of 7 per cent was then agreed to.

 

The North-China Herald, 23 June 1870

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT.

June 20th, 1870.

Before G. JAMIESON, Esq.

GERVAIS v. BUSSUTIL.

Claim for $90 or delivery of certain personal property.

   Plaintiff sued for the above amount, on account of certain articles of clothing and arms, his property, which defendant refused to deliver up.

   Defendant said, as the Court knew there was a question of partnership accounts between himself and plaintiff in process of arbitrement; and pending the result, he had declined to accede to the request made to him by plaintiff for the property in question.

   The Court sustained the plaintiff in his claim, as the defendant was not entitled to keep personal property against any decision which might be given in the other matter between the parties.

 

The North-China Herald, 10 August 1870

Dr. Martin, formerly Public Vaccinator for the French Municipality, appeared on Wednesday before the French Consular Court, to press a claim of Tls. 45-0 for his services in that capacity.  The Court held that the claim was excessive, as Dr. Martin had not acted for more than a year past, Dr. Galle having been appointed, and it therefore allowed him only Tls. 50, with half expenses.

 

The North-China Herald, 8 September 1870

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT.

August 30th, 1870.

Before G. JAMIESON, Esq., sitting for C. W. GOODWIN, Esq., deputy Chief Judge.

THE ORIENTAL BANK CORPORATION v.  J. ASHTON.

Claim of Tls. 1,223.81.

   Mr. Bird for Plaintiffs.

    Defendant did not appear.

   Mr. BIRD asked for judgment on a petition filed by his clients, praying the Court to order payment of the above balance due on a promissory note.  Certain goods had been hypothecated for an advance on the note, and their realisation left this sum still owing.

   Vouchers and accounts having been put in and sworn to, the Court gave judgment for the plaintiffs, with costs.

Published by Centre for Comparative Law, History and Governance at Macquarie Law School