Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DISTRICT COURT.—Monday.

[Before Thomas Beckham, Esq., District Judge] Judgments for Plaintiffs. —Lusk v. Midnight Gold Mining Company (heard last Court-day) ; Owen and Graham v. Alexander Nesbett, £22 ; W. Wallen v. H. Vivian,-.£20; Lusk v. Coroinandel Long Drive Quartz Mining Company ; wiuding-up order granted. Cases Adjoubned. — Porter and Co. v. Hannaford and others; llishwork v. Smith and others. Defended Cases.—Official Agent v. Cosmopolitan Gold Mining Company.—This case was heard last Court day, when judgment was deferred. It will be remembered that Mr. Pratt claimed.a sum of £68 for salary as legal manager, which sum was disputed by some of the shareholders. His Honor now remarked that the Court could not allow the claim of Mr. Pratt, and the amount must, therefore, be struck out from the list of liabilities. — — Official Agent v. Tradesmen's Gold Mining Company. It will be remembered i that last Court day this case was heard, when!

Dr. Wright objected to the contribution as seased upon him on the ground that he had paid up the whole of the calls and had not consented to an extension of the shares, lhe Court now stated that it did not consider that Dr. Wright was liable to be called upon to contribute to the winding-up of the company. —Several contributaries now came forward, and they had similar objections.—Mr. Hu<*h H. Lusk was then examined and crossexamined by the parties objecting. They were themselves afterwards examined, but Court declined to allow the objections. The schedule will be left open till this morning. —Same v. Marquis of Hastings Gold Mining Company. Mr. Rees for the Official Agent, Mr. Brookfield for some of the objectors. Mr. Brookfield took a preliminary objection that in these cases every amount ought to be proved before the Court in the usual way, before the shareholders were assessed to contribute anything. The way that these debts were proved here and at home were very different. His own opinion was that before anything could be done the amount of liability should be settled.—Mr. Rees replied, and said that the Official Agent arranged these matters in accordance with the terms of the Act. He did not think it would be wise to break through the practise which was now established. It would necessitate six times the amount of work without any material advantage. —His Honor thought the matter was worth consideration. He could not help thinking that the suggestions of Mr. Brookfield, if carried out, would be productive of much good.—lt was resolved to settle the point on the next sitting-day. [Left sitting.]

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS18710123.2.14

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 324, 23 January 1871, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
423

DISTRICT COURT.—Monday. Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 324, 23 January 1871, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.—Monday. Auckland Star, Volume II, Issue 324, 23 January 1871, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert