SUPREME COURT.—Sittings in Banco.

Auckland Star, Volume I, Issue 237, 12 October 1870, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.— Sittings in Banco.

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12

[Before His Honor Sir G. A. Arney, Knight, Chief Justice.]

His Honor held the usual sitting in Chambers this morning.

Snell v. Tokatea Gold Mining Co_PANT.^rThis was an appeal (part heard) from the Judge'of the Warden's Court, Coromandel.—Mr. Rees and Mr. Tyler appeared for the appellants. Mr. Richmond who appeared on behalf of Mr. Hesketh for the respondents, and asked for an adjournment, on the grounds that Mr. Macdonald who was to argue the case for the respondents was exceedingly ill and unable to attend the Court. Mr. Hesketh also had been compelled to attend a prior engagement. If the Court would adjourn the case to' Friday both the learned counsel would probably be able to attend. — Mr. Rees said he must oppose the application. Mr. Hesketh had been that morning within tho precints of the Court, and said nothing about a prior engagement.—His

Honor wa9 sure that Mr. MacCormick would not have sent such a message Unless he were really ill. If th'fe Respondents were not in a situation to appear before 'the Court, be could not give judgment behind their backs. —Mr. Rees said that the persons at present in possession were taking out very valuable stone. It was therefore of great importance a decision should be given as soon as possible.—Mr. Richmond said that no injury would be done ; the delay involved in the adjournment was only two days. He would undertake, if Mr. MacCormick should be unable to attend, Mr. Hesketh would argue the case for the respondents.—Mr. Tyler asked for costs of the application. —His Honor: I cannot award costs. I cannot say the parties are in default. —The hearing of the appeal was further adjourned to Friday. ■14; Katt ranga : Attachment. —Mr. Richmond applied to the Court for an attachment against John Lundon for non-payment of the costs of the argument upon the writ of prohibition applied for himself and another to restrain the Jud.e of the Native Lauds Court from further proceeding to amend the certificate of title to this ground. It appeared that the costs were taxed in the usual way." The amount of the costs fixed was £35 15s.—Mr. Richmond said that Mr. MacCormick had, on a previous occasion, obtained a rule nisi, but that application was found to be against the usual practice of the Courts in England. That practice, in matters of attachment, was followed by the Supreme Court of New Zealand. It appeared from the " Hilary Term Reports," that in two cases a rule for an attachment was absolute, namely : for nonpayment of costs, and refusal of the Sheriff to obey the order of the Court. —His Honor: You are' at will to abandon the rule nisi. —Mr. Richmond : Yes :— His Honor then granted tho rule for an attachment, returnable on the 16th of November.

(Left sitting.)