In opening the case, Mr Mouat said that no doubt an apology was clue for bringing a case invoking such a small amount" before His Honor, therefore he wished to explain the circurastauces under which the action was brought. Plaintiff had brought an action in the Resident Magistrate's Court; but the Resi dent Magistrate thought the evidence for the plaintiff and that for the defendant so evenly balanced, that he could not make up his mind to decide the matter, and suggested that it was a proper case for a jury! The plaintiff now brought the action before this Court as he con sidered he would now be able to bring out his ease more clearly, and that lie had better sub out the case to His Honor alone. The claim was for the use and occupation of certain ad vertising space at railway stations. ' Plaintiff was the sole lessee for the exclusive right of occupying walls at the railway stations for that purpose from Ist Jauuary, 1835. At that time defendant and others had advertisements shown at the railway stations under arrangement with the former sole lessee. When plaintiff's tender for the right was accepted, he gave defendant notice that the advertisements- must be re moved or paid for that year (ISSS). The ad vertisements were not removed and some of them were remaining now. The defence was that instructions had been given to one RusseU;(siuce deceased), who acted as agent for plaintiff, to have the advertise ments removed. ~-.C

Plaintiff gave evidence and produced books in which were entries which he said Russell had made as the result of his interviews with the defendant. They were—" Sparrow will not give more than £20 "; " Closed for £20." Mr Sim applied for <n nonsuit, contending that the action should not have been brought for use and occupation. .■■■.,. His Honor granted a nonsuit, without costs. The books produced had been so irregularly kept that he could not receive them as evidence of a contract between the parties.
