From Western Post 19 January 1861: DUBBO From our Correspondent DISTRICT COURT Before Mr. Justice DOWLING (The court was held in a room adjoining Mr FANNING's inn; which afforded more ample accommodation than the Court-house). Thursday, 10th January CHEATHAM v. MACKAE Messrs SERJEANT, of Bathurst, and COLQUHOUN, of Orange, supported the plaintiff's case. Mr. JAMES appearing for defendant. The plaintiff sought to recover damages for breach of agreement to deliver a quantity of cattle, and claimed £200. In December, 1857, Mr Duncan MACKAE, being about to enter the service of Mr James L CHEATHAM, of Borregobong, as superintendent of his cattle stations, was reminded by his employer that he could not be allowed to retain any cattle of his own, and Mr CHEATHAM suggested that MACKAE should sell him such as he possessed. MACKAE's cattle were running at Warrena about fifty miles from his new domicile. The number was estimated at about 300 and the price agreed upon £300. This sum was admitted to have been paid by instalments in a general account between the parties for stores, wages, &c., and the main question at issue was whether or not defendant had agreed to deliver. The contact not having been reduced to writing, occasioned a difference of opinion, after so great a laps of time, as to its terms. The plaintiff and Mrs CHEATHAM (not Betsy) declared that the defendant agreed on the word and honour of a gentleman to gather, deliver, and brand 300 head. Jervis CHEATHAM also supported this testimony, but on cross-examination had a strong objection to saying in what part of the house the conversation occurred. The Judge, however, having reminded him of the existence of a lock-up, the witness again (as he had often before done) consulted the interior of his hat, and said, "Why, if you must know, it was in the dining room". Defendant's version of the contract was that he was to collect as opportunity offered while in plaintiff's employ; that plaintiff was to supply him with horses, which he failed to do; that he never undertook to muster and deliver, but in fact sold the right of the brand; that plaintiff never asked him to deliver until he was going to leave the service, and that the present action was the result of ill-feeling begotten by the failure of a juvenile CHEATHAM to awaken the sympathies of a fair one then under defendant's care. The Judge thought the defendant should have branded and kept account of the cattle, and that the term of engagement was pointed to by the evidence at the time within which such branding (in this case identical, as he thought with delivery) was to be performed. He found a verdict for the plaintiff for amount claimed. ***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.