Alex. McWha vs. Isaac Brooks - This was
a judgment summons for £38 6s. 3d. The Judge asked defendant why he
did not pay; The latter stated that he was unable to do so at present.
The plaintiff, addressing the Court, said
it was very hard that after giving defendant credit for two hundred dollars
he could not get a cent of it. The defendant had a house in Cameronton and
every time that he (plaintiff) passed he seemed to be doing well. The defendant
had purchased 3 bbls. of beef for his dogs , and was guilty of this extravagance.,
whilst he (plaintiff), who had $10,000 due him on the creek, was often going
about half starving and could not get a cent. The greatest loafer around
would always pay something but the defendant would not pay anything.
Judge Cox: Mr. Brooks has the reputation
of paying his debts when he has the money, but there is little money here
The defendant said it was only spoiled beef he had purchased, for which
he paid but $3.
Judge Cox: Was it since judgment was granted
that the beef was purchased?
Plaintiff: No, sir, before that.
Judge Cox: The law abolishing arrest for
debt gives power to the Judge to imprison in any case where there is extravagance
which is held as contempt on the part of a creditor.
Judge Cox enquired of defendant whether
he would pay by monthly installments of $20?
The latter replied he would pay as fast
as he could, but he could not promise any time at present. He also denied
owning the house in Cameronton to which the plaintiff referred.
Judge Cox: the case must stand for the present.
The Court then adjourned.
JUNE 10th, 1865
Return to top of page | Return