From Western Post & Mudgee Guardian 5 June 1861: SMALL DEBTS COURT Monday June 3 Before the Police Magistrate, the Mayor, and E MARLAY, Esq. Henry FROST v John CAMERON - £7 3s 6d for promissory note. Verdict £2 2s 6d costs. Daniel EARLS v S A BLACKMAN - £1 16s the value of a pair of boots. D EARLES having been sworn, stated that a man in the employ of Mr BLACKMAN had given him an order for a pair of boots. Before making them he spoke to Mr BLACKMAN, who said "it is all right". Mr BLACKMAN denied having promised to pay for the boots; the man was in his employ at the time but was now discharged. Had the bill been sent to him with the boots he would have stopped the amount from his wages. When he said, "all right" he alluded to the man working for him. W MURPHY was put into the bos, but not being able to throw any light on the matter, the case was dismissed. J TAYLOR v William LYNES - 11s 6d balance due for board and lodging. Mrs TAYLOR, at great length, explained how the debt was contracted. The defendant had lodged at her house until he was able to get married; she found flour for the wedding cake, and had likewise accommodated LYNE's wife with board and lodging before th wedding. LYNES denied the debt, and put in a set off for whitewashing a room and the loan of a whip which had never been returned. Mrs TYALOR said the whitewashing was done solely on account of the wedding LYNES wishing to make the room as respectable as he could for Mr M'EWAN. The Court, after paying the greatest attention to both sides, gave a verdict for the defendant. P HOGAN v R CROSSING - £5 for trespass of pigs Mr CLARKE (for TEMPLETON) for defendant. P HOGAN, farmer at Nash's Flat, said he had for a long time been annoyed by a lot of pigs which had destroyed his wheat, corn, barley, and potato crops; he was sure the pigs belonged to Mr CROSSING; when he spoke to him about them, all he could get was "go and shoot them". Had tried to drive them to the pound, but there was such "hapes on 'em" that he could not manage them; they were sure to make for the yard. Mr DALY, baker, had been living at HOGAN's, and had often seen the dogs hunting the pigs; they always made towards HOSKING's yard. Richard CROSSING said he had a number of pigs on his farm, but they were all kept in a yard, from which only suckers could creep out. He had often been annoyed by people taking down the rails and letting strange pigs into his yard; he had turned out as many as seven at a time. HOGAN spoke to him about the pigs, when he told him there were not his! , and that as far as he was concerned he might shoot them. G HOSKINGS said he was in the habit of riding to the farm to see that the pigs were all right; they were kept in a pig proof yard; he had often seen strange pigs about the farm, even that day HOGAN's boys were driving a lot away, which they did not know to whom they belonged. Verdict £2 10s., 5s costs. Ann COHEN v RYAN - 18s 4d for goods sold. Settled out of Court. Ann COHEN v T KATEN - £3 3s 4d for goods sold. Defendant denied owing the amount having paid it with sundry pennyweights of gold. Mrs WALSH proved having seen defendant give Mrs COHEN 6dwts. Of the precious metal, for which he only received a piece of soap - the difference was to be placed to his credit. Complainant, who appeared astonished at the woman's evidence, gave vent to her feelings by exclaiming in a sepulchral tone "God forgive you". An account of the gold purchases having been handed in the Court after examining the, gave a verdict for the amount, upon which KATEN's exclaimed - "it is wrongestest bill, even that has been paid since creation". Richard JACKSON v Henry FROST - £1 9s for hay sold Mr BRODRIBB for FROST. R JACKSON said - the hay was given to defendant when the river was up two years ago; he did not make a demand before for the money because he owed FROST for a chain, for the value of which he was sued last Court day. The hay was not weighed, "it was compued by the men at a good two cwt". Mr FROST denied owing the money, or even giving any one in his employ to go to JACKSON's for hay; he always had plenty of his own. The Court were unable to come to a unanimous decision, Mr MARLAY having left the Bench, the case was consequently dismissed. R JACKSON v S H BARNES - £2 7s the price of a quantity of turnip seed. Mr CLARKE for BARNES. JACKSON said - some time since he offered BARNES a quantity of turnip seed, he left him 11 ¾ lbs., for which he asked 6s per lb. Mr BARNES told him to leave it and call again, when he called he said he would only pay for 4lbs., which he refused, he could not take it back as it was too late to dispose of it, people having put all their seed in. Mr BARNES denied purchasing the whole of the seed. When JACKSON brought it he told him that he only wanted 3 or 4 lbs., and that he would leave the whole for approval; on his calling a day or so after he told him that he could only keep the quantity he first named, and handed the bag to the boy to give to JACKSON who refused to take it. Verdict 16s, (which had been paid into Court), and costs; the 7 ½ lbs of seed to be returned. ***END*** Annette Piper Please note: Every effort has been to transcribe the above information correctly, however errors may have inadvertently been made. Spelling of surnames/places as appears in original.