From Western Post & Mudgee Newspaper 5 June 1861: Small Debts Court, 3 June 1861 (cont.): John BURGESS v E CARTER - £3 promissory note. Next sittings. W THORNBELL v Thomas FOWLER - £1 money lent. Verdict for plaintiff. J GARRATTY v W RYAN - £6 for hay sold. Settled. James COLEMAN v John COX - £4 10s for beast sold. Verdict for plaintiff. H J LAVERS v W BAYLY - £6 9s 10d goods sold. No appearance. Wilson RAMSAY v M H LYONS - 21s for medical advice. Dr. RAMSAY stated - that he was at HEARD's hotel the day after Mr LYONS was said to have been assaulted by Mr BARRY; his lip was very much swollen, and he consulted him as to what course he out to pursue; he advised him to apply cold water. LYONS denied having asked Dr RAMSAY for his advice, and called Mr MARLAY, who said on the day in question Mr LYONS consulted him as to what he ought to do with his lip; Dr RAMSAY being present, he declined giving an opinion, and referred Mr LYONS to the doctor who recommended cold water. The Court decided, as defendant had not himself applied for the advice, they would dismiss the case. W BALL v M H LYONS - £7 10s for killing two pigs. Mr JAMES appeared for complainant. W BALL said - in August last he found one of his pigs, which he valued at £3, dead in LYON's paddock; some time after he lost another pig, which he valued at £3 10s; he had no doubt both were shot by LYONS. The last pig was a sow which by this time would have been worth £10. In February last he was in his yard, and hearing the report of firearms, he looked towards LYONS', when he saw the smoke of a gun, presently the pig came home, and afterwards died in the public street from the effect of the wound; he had likewise lost a third pig, which he belived LYONS had shot. W FROST knew BALL's boar pig; he was near LYONS' house and saw him put a gun to his shoulder and fire at the pig; the shot did not take effect; he fired again, when the pig run a few yards and fell down; the pig rotted in the paddock. Mr LYONS cross-examined both witnesses at considerable length, and occupied the Court a ! long time, as to their jurisdiction, &c. - having read something somewhere that he could not point out, and which he wished one of the professional gentlemen present to find for him; but which they declined to do. The Bench having decided the numerous points against him, Mr JAMES wished to put LYONS in the box for the prosecution, which occasioned another waste of time, wand which resulted in the magistrates fining him 40s or seven days' imprisonment for contempt of Court, and giving a verdict for the amount claimed with costs; thus proving to Mr LYONS that a little law (a smattering of which he has)like "a little learning is a dangerous thing". E BAYLY v SIMPSON - This case, which has been so frequently before the Court, was withdrawn by Mr BAYLY upon condition of Mr SIMPSON paying the costs. T MILLER v J W BURGESS - For rent of land. Mr BRODRIBB for complainant. Mr CLARK (For TEMPLETON) for defendant. E CARTER, agent for MILLER, said he had let a piece of land in Perry-street to defendant for 24 weeks at 1s per week; at the expiration of the time he gave him notice that in future the rent would have to be 2s 6d per week. He had frequently applied for the amount and was told he would not pay it until compelled by the Court. Mr CLARKE obtained a nonsuit on the ground of there being no proof of occupation, no authority to increase the rent, and that the notice was signed by E CARTER as landlord. ***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.