The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1880-12-28 00:00:00

BULDILIa =NAL

Valens a Alfred Brovn.—Claiin of £BlO.. 04. for the
repair of a tent —Kr. loward for plaintiff ; Kr. Hann*
for defeadant.—Teis one related to repairs to a boat.—
Plaintiff said tee boat was to he pelted up in the yard and
repaired at • tad of about AL When she was Wild
and he had begun to pie on tee streaks, she was found to
be 'doubled,' several patches being on her, and defendant
said he'd have it off, ant have • look at the planks, and
the result was he had t put on five new planks. The bill
was gent in, and seven mouths alterdetedact found fault,
and plaintie offered k have it valued; but defendant
paid a copper on icceunt—By Kr. Hann.: Did net
sense to do all that we. required for AL The boat wee old
then, and worth about ri £4 When the bill wail com-
plained about he said be -hove it all into daywork."—The
Judge said this was • cast where he ought to have the
advantage of an assessor, who could have sat by his aide,
and told 61m what ought to be charged and what not.—
Plaintiff, by lle. Keane: Defendant offered to let bin
have the boat; but it was no good to him. He put ten
new planks in use—Allred Brown said that Kr. Valletta
cam, and asked him to giv• him a job: but defendant
said be did oot think the boat v&I worth repairing.
Valleea said she wail. aid defendant replied he was going
to lay the boat up, and Valens culd to and see her. She
was hauled up at Littleflields, end Vaasa came back and
said be would do her fcr £4. Defendant replied it wee •
eood deal to lay on i boat 30 years old; but Vallens
replial that she cud ha riper I for £4, and would then
lea- • lifetime ; defendant thereno hit him repair the boat
for £4. Afterwaris hi found Valles/ had almost broken
her to pieces, awl said he could uot put new planks over
old. Defendant said he c mid do it as he liked; but
never agree.l tb.t more ghoul I should be paid; nothing
was said about extras, and he hard nothing about the
extra price till be got the bill. Went dawn to the yard,
and asked —" How came you t chirge me day work r Be
d—" liv do Ido it otherwise r hut never said
anything about extent—By Kr. Howard: Nothing wee
arranged about having live n •er door timbers. Told
Veil .o. he e. 1.11.1 .1. a a h. ie," with the host; but
dd, admit would not Ise out more money on her. It was
it that won w 'I ,y after den, that he
answered plaintiff wh,ther ton plank and that plank
should be replaced; but defendant never agreed to lay out
more money on her.—Vallene, re.c.lied, said the Ave new
Osaka each side would cost about.(2. —The Judge believed
the defendant had proved hia case to the extent of £4.
The boat might have been more rotten than was thought;
but the builder wee bound by his estimate, just ass house.
builder might estimate a hoot, would cost so much to
repair, and when the agreement was made, And that it
could only be repaired at • ruinous ; but the law held
him to do it, nevertheleu—Verdict for £4, payment in •
mouth.—The Judge had no doubt the plaintiff meant to
make • fair charge' but defeodutt be did not believe
be motet to pay for day-work ; it was not likely he should,
as he bed no means of knowing whether the men did a
lair dav's work each day.
C. Bartlett e. Claxton, for rent of a cottage.-11r.
Howard for pleintiff, end Kr. Banns for defendant,—The
cottage, Kr. Howard said, was rented by Claxton at am
10.. a year, for shelter and putting editing tackle In.—Kr.
Bartlett. of Ceickerell. had • cottage at Langton, about
which Claxton came to him in the early part of 18' He
wanted it for • store, and the fireplace to dry their
clothe., and pining let it for £3 10e. • year, clear of
rates, toe rent to commence on May 1; but plaintiff had
neither net nor key.-Orees-examined : house was now
pulled don, because it wee left in • ruinous state: it was
pulled down in the latter end of 1879.-1 n C4OlO-41X5011441-
Mon by Kr. Hanna, Kr. Bartlett said so much that Kr.
Hanna styled him loquacious, and the Judge said: Kr.
Bartlett, this gentleman suggests that you are troubled
with • verbal di .1 rheas. (Laughter.)—lt appeared that
plaintiff claimed vent or two t Tina alleging that the
house was let for the dining 00400114, sad the rent was to
be paid wh.n the season was over. The particulars of
claim, however, stated the rent to be "F 3 10e per
annum." and the Judge bell plaintiff wee bound by the
particulars, which Kr. Howard said were not of his draw
in;, and the Judge soul he had an instinctive knowledge
they were n We Howanle—Tite house having been
pulled down in 1879, his Honour acne judgment for only
one year's rent, remarking that at one time eviction by
pulling down • house would invalidate the claim for the
whole of the rent. At the present time, the hardest
thing in our law of landlord and tenant was where the
latter had the house burnt over his heed, yet the land-
lord, although he mieht have me rived compensation from
the insurance Company for the loos of his house, could
recover rent up to the end of the term for which he had
let the house.