A PECULIAR CASE.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1319, 19 August 1886, Page 2

A PECULIAR CASE.

A peculiar case was heard at the Resfdenl Magistrates Court, Obrstcburch, ye»te'"day. The plaintiffs were David Brxtet and his wife Margr-td, who occupied a house belonging to the latter at RiccartoD, and the * defendant C. E. Hoddioott, a debt collector, and r’so, as he informed' the Comf, an insurance agent. The claim was for £lO, damages for trespass, the plaintiffs alleging that defendant had entered their bouse by falsely rep'eaeni'ng that he was sent by an Insurance Company, while his real reason the counsel for .the plaintiffs suggested yea to “ spy. oat the land ” in his capacity as debt collector.. The s'.deraents of ihe pintst ffs were to the effect that on July, 26, defendant called a*- the house when Mr Baxter r .w< a cat. He knocked, acd Mrs Baxter answered the door. Defendant mid he had called from the Insurance Company to inspect the property, and walked la without farther parley. Mra Baxter remarked that it was a funny _ thing the Insurance Company should send taunts - inspect the proper.y, Ss they hsd not done ao for the put four- yean. Defendant simply said “ Oh” and putt tag. fats hand on the wall,-reirarked that he saw it was .all plaster. He asked what office IFm ' B; xter was Insured in, and she replfod she tu not' certain, bat she believed It was the Globe. Defendant want through every - room of the honsa, taking about half an % hour to complete his inspection. Ha questioned Mrs Baxter as to how - she had becomepossessed of'the property j. and whether it was mortgaged, and She tons© hcc'own words, “told himaMaboui it.” In cross-examination, Mra Baxter admitted that the defendsnt had raked her if he could take an insurance oh her furniture. He was not at all mde inhis manner towards her.—The defendant said that he was a sab-agent for the Eqa tUde Insurance Company rnd that he bad gone to the plaintiff* house her .use he thought the owner vonid probably 1 he to Ir sure—Judgment was given for the plaintiffs for £2 and costs.