From Western Post, 5 January 1861: Police Court (cont.) TINDALL v TAILBY TEMPLETON for plaintiff. This was an action for £25, the amount of a promissory note for money advanced for payment of expenses incurred by PHILLOTT. E CLARKE proved the production of the bill as having been brought forward as evidence in a former action for payment of wages by TAILBY against PHILLOT, the defendant being in Court at the time. He has since said he had not, and never would pay the amount. No defence being set up, a verdict was given for the plaintiff. James CATLIN v. DICKSON and BURROWS This was an action for £32 10s for carriage of goods. James CATLIN, farmer, of Burrundulla, on oath, said he saw Mr. BURROWS on his road to Sydney, when he ordered him to leave his dray at HAYDON and Co.'s for loading at 13s. per cwt. He took his dray and obtained the loading, consisting of cases weighing, to the best of his judgement, about 45cwt, for which he signed the way bill. Cross examined by TEMPLETON: The dray loaded with DICKSON's goods was not his own, it belonged to a man of the name of PAULDING, who had sent it to Sydney in charge of a man of the name of MILLS, who broke his leg and gave him charge of the dray with the understanding that he was to receive half the amount paid for the carriage. J GREENLAND, hired by the last witness to drive the team, saw BURROWS at HAYDON's and was told to be careful with the old tom cases. They had an accident on the road, which detained them. He was left in change, when Tom MILLS and PAULDING came and stole the goods from him. He followed them to Mudgee. PAULDING delivered the goods to DICKSON. He heard MILLS say that he was to fetch a load of goods, and was to have halves. H BURROWS deposed - In October he employed PAULDING in Mudgee to carry the goods, which CATLIN now put in a claim form. On his way to Sydney he overtook PAULDING's dray. In Sydney CATLIN told him he had loaded his own dray. He (Mr. BURROWS) had a full load put upon PAULDING's dray, and on returning to Mudgee heard that an accident had happened. PAULDING went out to see the cause, and afterwards delivered two-thirds of the goods. He did not object to pay the full amount of the loading. His difficulty was, who was entitled to receive it, he having employed PAULDING, who demanded the amount, and CATLIN, who had, it appeared, taken charge of the dray through the accident, and who had delivered a small portion of the goods. James PAULDING, on oath, stated he agreed to fetch some goods, and stated a dray to Sydney; on its way the driver broke his leg. CATLIN who was in company with the dray took charge of it. He received word from CATLIN that an accident had happened, and that he could not bring on the dray; he started to Cherry Tree Hill, where he found the goods on the ground. Thomas MILLS, the driver, said he was sent with the team to Sydney for loading for DICKSON and BURROWS. He called at Mr. BAYLY's for a load of wool, where he met with an accident which prevented him from going on. He told CATLIN if he would take charge of the dray PAULDING would no doubt pay him his "regulars". He was not drunk when the accident happened. It was impossible "the pole of his dray being the wrong way". His Honor suggested that the case should be settled by arbitration, which defendants were willing to accede to. It was, however, eventually left to his Honor's decision, who said Messrs. DICKSON and BURROWS had acted as he should have done. He would give the plaintiff a verdict for £29 5s, with the understanding that he should pay the owner of the tam his fair proportion of the money. Mr. TEMPLETON gave notice that he should move for a new trial. ***END*** Annette Piper (Please note: The above has been transcribed with care however errors may have inadvertently been made. Spelling is how it appears in original.)