Tuesday, Nov. 30, 1875. [Before Major Jfidwards, It.M.] CIVIL. Kells v. Hori Kerei.—This was a judg ment summons for £6 10s, and tlie de fendant was ordered to pay in one month, or in default to go to gaol for one month. Levy v. Trafford.—This was an action on a judgment summons for £16 10s. Hr Hodge appeared for the plaintiff. The defendant was examined, and stated that he had no means of paying. He was living with his father, and received £100 a year. He had no banking ac count, and had not been drawing any cheques lately. The amount had been due three years. Mr Hodge said that Mr Levy had been very patient, but it was time it was paid. The E..M. said he would allow until to morrow morning for the amount to be paid, and in default he would have fo go to gaol for six weeks. Howe v. Holly, sen.—This was an ac tion on a judgment summons. To be paid before noon on Saturday, or in default one month's imprisonment. Brown v. Jordan.—This was an action for goods sold and delivered. Mr Hutchison, who appearedfor the de fendant, said the defence was coverture. The defendant was a married woman, separated from her husband, and the law was distinct that a married woman could not be sued. He quoted an authority on the point, and had others to support him. The proper course was for the plaintiff to sue the husband, and as he had not kept up his payments under the deed of separ ation they would afford every facility to do so. The R.M. said it seemed like a hard case, but the best course for the plaintiff to pursue would be to take a non-suit. Mr Brown said that for some time the defendant had paid regularly, but even tually ran up an account. He could take no other course but a nonsuit. Nonsuited accordingly but without costs. Chadwick v. Lynen, an action for £34 4s for cash lent, and goods sold, and delivered against Joseph Ljnch, of Wairoa. Mr Betts appeared for the plaintiff, and defendant did not appear. Mr Chadwick proved that he had lent the money and sold the goods, and that defendant had repeatedly promised to pay. Judgment for the amount claimed. Chadwick v. TrafEord, an action for £8 10s for money lent. 