The Glorious Uncertainty of the Law.

Cromwell Argus, Volume III, Issue 125, 2 April 1872, Page 6

The Glorious Uncertainty of the Law.

Does any one who is not a lawyer or a ruined client know what a “ sitting in banco” means I If any one wants to learn practically what it does mean, 1 advise him not to make the attempt unless he has got a spare thousand or fifteen hundred pounds to dispose of. Some of these “ banco” cases are sweetly interesting things to contemplate if you have no part in them. It is grand to look at a battle from a safe vantage-ground, where neither bullet nor ball can reach you. It is a beautiful sight to view a storm and shipwreck from the shore. It is charming to behold a mother and twelve children, one risingabove the other like short stepping-stones, if you are not the father of them, with a limited income. And it is equally line to look on at a “banco” allair, as long as it is not your case which is being argued. Here is a specimen one I have been witness to. About 25 years ago, a now dead and buried city resident bought and paid for a section of land from another now dead and buried city resident of Auckland. Before the buyer of the section died he made a will, and gave the section to his son, and at his death his son built on it. Then the son of the seller after a time discovered, or thought he discovered, . that his father had no right to part with the land, and he brings an action against the son of the buyer for arrears of rent, interest thereon accruing, and also for the land to be restored to him as the rightful heir. But ■ now comes in a brother of the seller of the ■I section, who says that the son now claiming I the property has no right to it, inasmuch as I lie is unable to prove that he was born in ; wedlock. The son said not to have been I born in wedlock goes to law against the son \of the father who bought the section. The j jury declares he is born in wedlock, and that , the land belongs to him, and all that is built thcron. One would think this would end | tlie dispute. Not a bit of it, for it is hardly , commenced. The beaten sou applies for a “ rule nisi ” for a fresh action. The case is argued for twelve days in banco, and a fresh action is allowed. Then the brother of the original vendor applies for an injunction that the rents of the property shall not be paid to I either of the claimants. Injunction, on argument, is granted, (costs altogether up to this point £482 (is. Sd.). Now another claimant comes forward, who says that 20 years ago he took a mortgage over the land which was sold by the one father aforesaid to the other father hereinbefore mentioned, who willed it to Ids son ; but he had not registered the mortgage because beheld collateral security, in the shape of an acceptance, which ho had endorsed over to a third party who ! had died intestate before the bill matured. A writ is now issued in prohibition, and lawyers arc puzzled to know how the case stands, although their clerks arc not in entering the costs. There have been arguments in de murrer, making the costs in all amount b £672 6s. 4d. ; rules nisi, applications foi specilic relief, interpleaders, non pros and - more arguments in banco, which have added I £292 13s. -Id. more to the expenses previously , | incurred in the proceedings. There is a good I deal more yet to be done, and the dispute, | it is thought, will be brought to a termination L | some time towards the end of the year 1880. | This is “banco.” The property under lit! I gatiou is worth about £650. By the time ii , has been decided who shall have it, ovei i £2OOO will have been paid in law expenses. I Glorious thing “banco” is, is it not ! Nearly I as expensive as horse-racing, but not half sc - j exciting.—Auckland ll'eekhj News.