LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 428, 10 February 1909, Page 9

LAW REPORTS.

1 SUPREME COURT. CRIMINAL SITTINGS. FORGERY CASE A WORD ON POLICE REPORTS When the criminal sittings were resumed yesterday before Mr Justice Cooper, Jeflnos George Kenneth Muifitt, a young man who had been found guilti at Napior of haung forged and uttered a bank diaft for £30, which was enclosed in a registered letter addressed to "Percy J Murfet," was set fomard for sentence Reference to tho police officer's r«port touching Ins antecedents was made lij prisoner. It was true, he said, that he left ChriEtehurch owing his board. Tho amount of arreais was £3, and that was owing to an injury to his leg pro>ontmg him from following his employment Since he left Chribtehurch lie had settled the ampimt due. all joung men lie had had his ups and downs The fact that ho had had to spend five weeks in prison awaiting trial had been a veiy So \ere lesspn to him.

'.."His Honour; said.that he> had carefully ;considered. the case. ■■ Prisoner", who Tyae : a first offender;', had. been acquitted '■ on the opimfc 'charging him with having forged the jeceipt.fqr the; registered : letter." "There could be no doubt, but that prisoner thpught■th.e. .letter was, for him' when he .signed 'for 'it/at'ithe. post..office.-', Having opened tlio letter- an,d ; found, v th'at it• was' not for'; him. he.' had . put"'" the/ :: draft: v : tp'; his ',' 'own Aise.:''That -i- was ..done in , a .moment pf .' sudden .; temptation and ■ when '' prisr Pfier' : '.'p'as". , 'hard ' up.. Tho:.'police■'. offir per-'s .'.report, ; : which'.'was"'.unfavourable 'to .prisoner,.' ppntained-, somewhat 'Vague, .stater - .ments;';'. Iti was .stated that .prisoner; .did was .inserted. there wag ,np record/ of ■him h,a,v : irig:)ieen n"n".the liands"of, the "police. lOrdinarily,'.in. 'a case'of .'the kifld, crjmina] intent;'wa|. : established' from; fifiit -'to lastj l-but'vtjie^.cirpninsiiances;. case 'showed only, .aisiidderi lapse -from/honesty. serious : .qne' no . ;vajury; :,wpul^ prisqiier' were - given . a;.' : chance. .CH^'.'(his. IHohour)'-'.wag . conspious '■ that; in, ygjan'ting. prqbation. in :,thp:. present case he' might be ■ stretching 'the provisions , of> the.--Probation' .Acti' : because.' l fprgery was■ 'a 1 • very.-.serjoqs"' Offence.. '-However;, ho would .'grant probation for of' two years, .on.condition that prisoner did his best tp earn an '.honest livelinpdd: and that he pay bapk ,in eight equal ihstalmenta.Vthe: amount which, he had stolen ,h-iBO--to'gether witli. the costs of '■■ tho proses gution, ■:. "•'•■ >;,>'■'.'>, ■'-,■■'■";;•'.■..■■ \'.'■.;]!; ■ ■ ■''■■ '.■■■'■' i"-"' \')■;■ ■'•■: \ ,CHARO!E Qf 'gMROTTING*' :^' ;; ;S DEFENCE; OF! MISTAKEN IDEN^riY;/'; ' ■'.Unusual; interest; was manifested' jn the trial' pf ■Wiliiajn.Neil, Jphuii'Gormjck,". a.nd Edward .Richard" Black,, three 'young .men, who' wereJindjptad .for,that .tljejy di<j, pji "l)g----.cember: 7," rpb : erieV Jliind::o.: J prgensen , of 'at w.atph/- and- chain,-; .sovereign, case; twp'ha.ndr :;kerohiefs,". : >.:& tin; of tobacco^,"anil 48s< ■ in; jnoiiey,"' '■ and; !yiplonce towards |j|m.-.;' ■ -,'-..,;':■.;;■.'.'' ' ■"-.'■' • • f.. '' -AH the -accused', pleaded': vnp>. r guilty.'<; Mr.R,.''B.'William's."appeared 'pri.'.ben.a.lf ; pf ffeil and, M''t!ornuok ; , ;huV;Bla.ok;,.",iU )on -.iwtipni an 'indetenninate'.■ sentence';;',iwas : recently; ■ im-! iposcd/waslnpt represen^d' ; hy ■ cpunsoi.':. ;'* ;

\y" /Narrative of the Crip; v; v ; ,' ! '■ Prosecutor;, stated that" at ; 11.50 'oil/.'-ifcfig ■njght in : question he lefts 4ho:hguso'of. '"a friend. in , El|ice Street, vyhere lwU\ad bepn'speiiclinp the'.e.Ypn'ing.' It was' :'ji -moonlight; riighic;:::&s he>'W9Papproaching . tHp' corner pf Jbiiiice and BrQugha,'m stre'pts ha iaw/four'men..;';He..Passed -between ;therii,' there'being ;three/on one 'Bide and one .pji .tljp, sptlior.;".iWneivho had ; got abqut two orAhree f .then pinned his.arms clown to.his.side; Whilst ■h'elwas ■being.held^ ■'Bl6s ' enumerated > ; .in the™:charge -/from Shis . tiocket' ' jSi'Oprmiplr , tlien,*, Eiirqpichjm". a severe .blow' on the. mouth,- and when (lie put up his 'hand to protect.'hiniself lllapk ) tpid'.'•'M'Oq'rv inick to give-'.hiin anbtljer blpiy.". : Jl'Cpjjnick,.however,, said: ,''Ohj no I''lt, : is,-all over now ]■'.!■ Nest morning; whilst he' was onbus'i-, iiosS;at'Courte'nay Place, he saw, M'Corinjck .and Neil at tho, Albion flpto|ian,4ii}fprined ; tho police,; HadVgoije:habit'into the hotel two detectives' came"' on' the'sceno. When, the .detectives brought tflem.out'pf the liptol .Nflil- bolted, Ijilt V'as daptured'/.'Oii JDecemberl9 prosecutor ideiitified jßJaq): in a ■parriage;atihe Thprnddn rai,l\y*ay "st^iipii.,'; : . '■'■ :'-1 To Air. rVVilliams: 'Hβ was, paiight■'"•. very tightly : by : the:'throat. 1 ■^^Black Hyas-handcuffed , to another.man when he'ideiijifiedhim, ■ '■'V 'Carl Moellbr,mus jo .teacher',"Ell jpe"§treet, stated that,' when prp'secutor returned to his -ho\ise,'his nose ancl 'mouth were bleeding and , .lie .was , very much" upset.'.":?; ■.''^■■ ■;'... :';'-■ ; .. ■■■ ';■ } yYni, ' .;.rcet^urant^keaper,':- Vivian Street,- deposed, thaf,' for, s'onjc time' prior to the date in quostiohyM'Oormick arid' Neil had Btaj'cd at his esta,blishmejit,'occupying the' same room. 'They usually v came ih at' night between lliSO p,m. and 12.30' a.m. !dnthp niaUt in question tfiey returned in company with another man, who was drunk. That was between 12.15 and 12.30 a.m. ■To Mr.' Williams: Neil and M'Coqnick showed no signs of intoxication on tho night mentioned. ' i Tho Po|ics Version. Detective Cassells stated that he and Deteetuo Connelly told N,eil and M'Cormjck at tho Albion Hotel that they wore wanted at the police station. Neither seemed inclined to mo\o at iirst, and then if oil Jioited, but wab captuied by Detective Connolly and Jorgoiisen. On the way to tho station M'Oormick said, "If you arp taking us down for rooking a bloke, and ho does not pick us, don't put us in on tho crust." Neither of,the pnsonois kriew at that time what they were requiied for. }Vhen he was chaiged M'Cormiok said: "You have not got that against us suiely? You say it was on the night of (September 7." Witness replied: "No, last night, December 1." M'Cpraick then eaid: "Oh, that is. all right. I thought you said September 7; I don't know where. I was last night. I was snickered." When asked his narao at the hotel door, Neil roplied ''TJionisoji." On tfio date in question Bkck was living in Foresters' Lane, about 400 yards from where Jl'Cormick andv NeiJ wero residing. '<. To Mr. Williams: Upon being arrested M'Cormick had, 2,5. on him, and Neil nothing. N Did you find any of tho stolen property at the place where they were residing?— No. Do men engaged in {his class' of crime Work in bands?— Yes. You itnaw that them was s band operating in the city at the time?— Yes. Have others who were assaulted identified their attackers? —Yes. And some have not?— Some could not identify anyone. Have you known cases where men have picked out impossible persons?—An instance of thatikind. occurred this morning, A man who had been robbed and assaulted last night picked out a man who had 'spent the night in tho lock-up. (Laughter.) Dp you think that the method adopted in connection with the identification of Black was proper?—l think it would have been better if ho had been identified at the police station. Detective Connelly gave corroborative evidence.

■ 'Ernest' Robinson stated that:.on the night in question , M'Cormick 'arid Neil-had sujbper at-his restaurant in Tory Street. They came' to. his p|ape'.-:,\jith:. another man; -who was under the' influence of liquor, at .about 11.40 p.m.' It was :"after midnight -when they left his premises. There was some argument outside in regard to the payment of the suppers, which was made by, the man whose name he did not know. , .'■ ■ ' '"'"".■•"!■■ . Arthur Smith, wool-scourer, .stated that about tho date in question he was residing at Robinson's fish-shop in Tory Street. ; He had for the past six weeks beon working in Marlborough) and 'had , ' been'brought-over specially, to' give" evidence. ' ■'.■' Ou. tije .night. mentionedis;tlie whilst he was-

talking to a friend, he saw M'Cormick and Noil walking along Vjviaii Street towards Tory Street at. 11.35 p.m. ,'"■ Thoy wero proceeding at a slow being apparently under the influence of liquor. Ho went to post, a letter whilst thoy were in the-fish-shop, and, on a.few niiinites beforo midnight, they, wero still there. . Ho had to hurry tetlje letter-bpx to catch; tho midnight delivery. .<- ".--...'•, ,' ■ , . Mr.Myors: Was there any liquor on the fish-shop promises that night?—Oh,: no! ■ Have you.had any letters or papers from Robinson whilst you have been away?— No. ! Who' was the friend to whom you'were talking beforo .you went, to post tholetterP-r-I don't know his naihe. •'.■-,■■' ■/ \ .'..-.. 'Where does ho live? —Round Dixon Street, I think.:- . ' •■■■■';:' '/'' : '•..'.-;■;'■,-. i Have you seen Robinson since you re-, turned from . Marlborough ?—-Ycs .1 stayed with him last night and have seen hjm,today. '■' .. '. ■_- y- , '-'■;■'• :. ■'■ -.' ■ . .... '; Did you and Rpbihspn discuss the case at lunch:to-day?—Yep. : ■"■ ''.; . .-.<■ ■ .vDid.-.-he • tell ■ yp, u what questions he was askedin evidence?— No. .. ... ... ■■ '.'•' The. jury, which retired -..at.4.15, returned a()'5.15 - witn a-.verdict of guijty.- : ; , ■' .; ./.'Sentence ■ was.- deferred, until Thursday morning. -. .-■'• .; '..-.■ ; . ' ■■'■'[.:■ '.■ ~-. V Conyjotlpn pn a Sinijlar. Charge,/ ' :, Jehn McCormiclc, ;■ who_ was one of the accused in. the case just disposed, of, was then tried on a charge of having, on December 7, ro|)bed George Reid of a watoh and • chain, sovereign case.•:and ribbon guard, and, at the same time, used violence towards him. i '.'\}\ plea of. not.guilty was entered by oner,'who was, defended by Mr. R. B. \Vil'liams."-. :■.;'.' : •'.-. '. :,■::'.- ';'■'.' ;, '■'-.■'■.' . ■'■■ ". .Prosecutor, who is a fireman, said that, on , the night in question,. as he was returning hpme at 10.30 o'clock,' ho was tack]ed"at the corner of Davis:Street men,' who deprived him of ■ the articles mentioned in tho cjiargo.■'. Subseguently .Mcdormick, who had grabbed him by.'the ; throat ,in_the first instancoj suggested •to his ■ companions that they should give him a blow.to ; quieten': him whilst they Were getting'away. Prosecutor, •however, said that vthat;would bo' unnecessary ias he would not-say anything,■•-'' When prosecutor began to folloyv his. attaqkers.they ran away. .He had 'no| : difficulty in!ideptifyr ing: prisoner.:,- ', ;"'■'■'■"§: :':■;: ■':-,-: '': ■ ; ; ' : ■'■■■:.: :' George, CJpak, bootnaker, deposed; that proseciiter complained to him that : he 'had been ,robbed.' Shortly before he met prosecutor he;."saw four, men • running.away,. Ho had identified one of tho men—McCormick; .

< Evidence, was also [given by Detective. CassellsV and ' Wm. l'lynn,' ■;.- restaurant-keeper, Viviaif'Street.' -Ah -■-/-■- - - ~ '■■■■

■/■FForr r the.defence,' Win. /Neil, who was one of : the "accused in the' previous. case,' 'seated .on; the- jiightf": mentioned, / h,e was" ' company■; yrith ; At thej hour ; speci-. lied, in th'p 'charge'; they, iyerp, in"; Manners .'^tfeet.-'."■,--.'."."•,•'. T'-i^''■-■:"','';:-"■ • /'/-'."//■''■' : Tpußlr-. flyers: /.Tjjey liad 'as cpmpanipns tw'p other jheii -for, part/of thp timep-'_■;■" ! ; ■■ ■■ -Re-examined,,'witness stated that eighteen mdntfis'.'ago:he Vas'brpugh't:before'the;.Cflurt. : for. assault'■:and resisting' , the; ppljoe.: : ~! ; ' " .'\';'rh'e'"juryV : .w|»joh/Tetired"at-ft2si'':rrtiirn(sd' aV6:.p.in, with a^crclict^pf-guilty.;^;;- , ..Sentencp. lyas defefre4 .ijntil ; f;o-mqrrow morning. , '-.' ' '..• ■,'■'■-■••..''.:,■: : ','. '■•'■'■:?■ ■ :-:i':'-' : \' 1$ ;,; LIBEJ|i.;;;i :J;^- : ;; : /; r; -w;TH^ ; QTII^)TpNEL;^ ;;^n;: SPEGI^JIJRI^TOF^s|IX : ;■ Applications. for /special; jiiries; formed: the SHbject'.qf-{.woi;'summonses'!' recently,.'brpugljt by plaintiffs in. the,cases pf Murdoch McLean;, Sppsj and' John :M '.Loan and Qo),: Liniitpd,; vewus, the . "New, Zealand . Times , '. r ;Coinpaiiy,. : Limited, and -the., same versus ■the^We]linEton;Publish- ■ ing Company.'; Thp ! .olaim ; in.eaoli instance"is, for put .'of'j'tj)B,'piiblioetjon.':'of ;-(i;:risjpprtVpf. ft.djsT: .p^ss}6n^by!'^e : ■'di'tipnb'of:.'labpur ; .ivt;the. Qtira tunjiel, t(io cohr ''tfactofrs;' foV>;.i[V'liio}i" ■.pljtijitijfß.-V'.'-.'The. grflu^d^fqr';thp. that for thp'. proper,.trial .of the case oxper't knowledge.iwas !feguired?' : f™ m,!Mr '.■,>y-''\y>, ; '-^^ i ;. : :]' } ; ■■'/,•:; ..;. Mr. Justice Chapnianj' in; dejjyering.iudg.'morit; yesterdajv-.b'ased, liis,. rcriiarks'.'on 'the mattor ; published" ;-.by.the !-'Npw -Zdaland' Times Company,; adding. that, in-thp: ease of thp■ Wellji)gtpivPub.ljsning Company,' the same result.'would' ojisuo. The matter cpm'-. plained pf purppi-ted tp be a irep6r.ji of a sittiiig. of tho Miners' Federation,'at jvhjch one T.' J'. ! ifblloy adc|ressed the/ineeting,' a'tid it; \vas : furtlieE addressed by.,- its ■ chaifman, -R.. Sfmi)le.. v Tho Bpoakprs.'commeiitecl'strongly in/genera] terms on" the accp'rariipdatipn ■ jirp.yicled for workmen at the works by plaintiffs, an 4 made certajn- 6necjfio allegations," Those ■ particularly' referred to' bv the plaintiffs pn ; the pfespnt m.pfi'pn iroro/that tjie:water sujp r ■plifid ,'')vas poispnpus nridprpducod ii swelling if ' -ifc tpuched th'e. Blightcst ■ cut,-" tljere r were.ppisphflfls;'fumeg in the tunnel," so. : that "pvory, day, men' were takijig fits- qwing t) the:poisonpUß fiimesi' , '' Vunimons'was supported by, an affidavit, which set out the .various classes, of: workmen •/employed,'.and stated;'-that it might be , necessary:for plaintiffs to.: adduce '"evidence , -; as. to- the. effect of such.a.publipatiojv in incifeasing the difficulty. p{;obtaining such labour an4"the eppsequent idamage .to plaintiffs,. their. credit ■■and"; repW tation. ;V It was that' the plaintiffs might require the evidence of persons engaged.ill similar business";and employing simir lar clafisps'pf and this ypuld call' for a'.jury of .bij'sinpss-men. , ' Jj; is further.'al-le'^ed.-that: the. plaintiffs intend: tp' > : addu'po of ..spjeritific .witnesses':to djsprove the statements, pf fact- iii the pijjjHpatignj'."and particularly th'o'allegatipnV as 'to poison? pus water and poisonous iiimes in the tunnel. / Referring, tp the earlier allegatiens in-.tho affidavit, his Honour said that ■n'dthjng was suggested' to ,lea,d' him tp .think' that any difficulty I was likely 'to* arise put of the .bu'si-' ness ; ?'sp<?ct pf; the case-'ivJiich, cpulp , "not ftp :dealt wrth by"a cpmmpn j pry-draivii from thp full, panel/' The mat'tor. most /relied: on was tho'. necessity for calling expert evidence as ■tp" the nature and quality; of the water and its effect -'upon puts pr. wpunds, and'; as ,-tb ■• the ■ pjtis'tencp. pf poisonbus fumes, and-their effect It was .suggested.that the:ne-. fessity' for. calling such evidence' showed that the case- was- one -: in which: expert knowledge .was required.. Hβ 'assumed that expert evidencp. would bo called by plaintiffs, aiid he assumed that it waspossiblo that defendants' might'also call such evidence. Ho could not, however, think that'; it 'was - likely that, the case or.aii.y ipiportant part of it 'wpiild-tiirn-j upon a 'dj'reci. cdn/|(ct expert ivif-' hes'sesas to the nature:pf tho water pr as to' thp'existence prbffec't of'.fumes in the tunnel.; It :was* wh.'en serious, sjnd ppssjbly' d|fficiilt questions'. , wero likely -to arise as' 1 important issues in. the'actidn.'.whiph required/for their solution, the superior;.decree of education or .training presumed to exist,in a:specie,} jury that it was found that pxpert'kn.pwledge was required.- It could'hot, however, be:said that 611011 knowledge was roijuired in every pjso in which either party had, or both parties had, anticipate that some or trie ques/' tions likely to arise would call for explanar tion by, exports. ?'ln almost all tho' cases of negligence, commpnly' called accident oases,-, medical ,witnesses were called, arid these .-wit , , "nesses gave:expert-evidence. In-many of. these cases conflicts' of considerable magnitude arose between medical experts, yet, in' mnst of them, ■ tho ; ,issuo was ono capable of being decided by a jury drawn from the prdinary■'. .panel.- .'.Tho ' present cases seemed' to : him';, at the ■ /most.. to ; '.inypjve tho •. calling'; of ;, expert ; evidence ' ijo spme" extent. It was' not a case, to bp'decided by experts, pr a case in which the decifiion \y&s likoly mainly to depend on thp weighing of export evidence. For thoso reasons ho. liad comp to the.conclusion that it couldnot bo desonbed. as a : oase in which expert knpwledge was required. . The. summonses wpuld be dismissed; with £2 2s. cqsts. ' "■'Mr; Morispn appeared •'■ pn behalf,of plaintiff s"; -the Atternoy-General,. Dr.'' K.C., fpr the "Now Zealand Times'! Cdmpariy, A Limited; and Mr. Harold F. Jphnstpn for. tho Wellihgtpn-Publishing Company;: ■'■'■'■: ARBTHEDEFENCES EXPLICIT '-■■ ; ' ■ ■ . FURTHER, DETAILS SOUGHT...." Applications for more explicit defences and for leave to set down the case for hearing were/then considered. Mr.' Mprison, . 'who appeared on behalf of plaintiffs, referfed-first' of, ; aU,to .the, statement of defeaoe'filed 1 by..

the Wellington Publishing' Company. That pompany's defence; was that. J,ho statements of fact were-true in substanco and.in fact, and tho statements of: comment. were fair comment. The defenco filed by the "New Zealand Tiip'es' 1 - Company, Limited, was not so explicit. Botli of the defendant companies were notified .in December last that they'would bo 'required to (ile-more expiicjt : statements of defenco' within ; fonr days. Plaintiffs wanted to know, what conditions affectiiig the men employed at the tunnel works were alleged to b« bad;' what water was alleged to ho poisonous; tlio names of tho men who had allegedly ■ suffered. from swellings on account of the water -dripping upon, .them whilst they . wero working; of thoso who had ; allegedly: suffered from fits in the tunnel, and oftliemaii who had : sustained a broken nose; also thd dates of those occurrences. As a result of some correspondence the "Now Zealand Times'.' Co. had furnished, some namea and-particulars, but had refused to.put the matter on the record of the Court. For the purposes of tho trial it was necessary, he contended, that there should appear on the record what dedendants relied upon in" regard totheir plea of juetification. . . ■ " ■ .'.- . .; >" His Honour: Are not these matters for interrogatories? . ~'.,:' . -, Mr. Dalziell: That is what we suggest. .'; Mr. Morison, resuming, said he could quoto. authorities in-support of his contention/ It would,, he continued, be impossible for'plaintiffs ,to call witnesses'.to -refute defendants , allegations unless it", was known what was sought to bo proved by defendants., If defenflantstook the responsibility of pleading jusr tirlcation they. must also take the responsibility/of proving it.' '.■ '.•'■■•; - f ; ~ ■:■: '■"'.' - '■'■ .■'■!■'.

His' Honour: It will be seen that in: the pouTso of a; letter; thd ''New'; Zealand ■ Times''. Cp, gave, a description of the workers'. cotr tages,' whichvwere alleged to be unfit for' human , habitation. ;.-': ■:; V ;, V::"'

. Mr. Morjson submitted, that; those .and other particularsfshbuld be on the : file of the Court as indicating the issues 'for trial, ■'■ ■■■'■■Mr. Dalziell, for the '/New Zealand.Times" Co., LtcL, contended .that .all that .the rules requij-gdwas tbaV a ; statement; of- defence' should give' fair; notice..to-plaintiffs "of .the kii)d ;pf: defence that it .was,intended to .set up, and.'in addition,.,particulars' as .to-the time and place of occurrences; and the names pf persons connected wjth". the; matters at issue. ■ It common knowledge that'alleged Jabour offences in New/Zealand .excited exceptionalpublic interest. Defendants; in commenting upon the conditions at the tunnel works, had merely pointed ta ; whal was set put in the condensed report of tho meeting of a. public; body; which■ was: a fair', report. Defendants did notwant to setup, any other statement'except '\rijatwas contained in the report.' >,The effect of limiting the defence would . be'' that■. defendants '. 'would be V asked to "establish, something which they had .not said, but would.have. bijen their defon'cp upon 1 some particulars .that wore not contained in the publication in question. Defendante deemed the inforinstion- which. had. .bepn'; 'published .to bp' a \ niattep , of .public in'terestv., Tliey (lid,.not want.tp be limitedas" to the: eVideiice they.,should call regard to the.;statement^.", ,■■■;!;■:;. .'\'>S ;o.'^?.

Mr. Johnston, on bphalf of the Wellington Publishing Co., pointed out that that Company had rplifd upon one Molloy, who vat the author of the alleged libel, t<) substantiate his statements. The plaintiffs, who lived at the works, were in a better position than defendants to srather the information which they teqniral J* was most important that the scope of the evidence for the defence should not be limited. His phente. maintained that in taking up the present summons, plaintiffs had adopted n wrong procedure. They (the defendants) wero uiljipg to Give paiticularß similar to those Piven by the "New Zealand Times" Ltd. The proper course for plaintiffs would have bcv>n bv way of interrogatories. His Honour said that ho would take time to consider! his judgment It was decided that tho case should be hoard during tho forthcoming civil sittings, out tho exact date was not fixed.

■ ■''&'■ sitting;in Chambers"was ! held by Mr Justice Chapman'/yciterday'.''; Probate of the wills of .tlie.fpljpTving.decpaspd .persons- was granted :--Anton N ielsen, ■ farmer,"; * Cabbage Point, Auckland; and- Jas? f ho£. eatley, 'ijisitf' tlemari; ; of iNelspu.,; "; ; u ;^l:^'^w

T A;, change; of venue.. frbni ;• WellingWHo Greymquth"was ap'plied : for .:.b>ydefondanta mHbe^actionVofvjv:: T. Martin.v Kennedy and F. Sheedy. This is an" 'action.: about a'trpst:relating -to •property situated ; , at:,Greymouth, ; wbicli:isderiied''by (lefendants;- Plaintiff alleges* that defendants repeived-theprbceeq's'-.p'f, the late J.'T; Fitzgerald's,, life .inswrahce v pb]icy in/ payment of a,charge l pri the..trust property-. ' : The grorad for; the flpppsition"'to,'tlje 'applicaiipn' was that the action would bp more conveniently tried ,at Wellington. '•'. Hj s "Honour said '. he would take timo to consider'his "judgment; ■■! SiMf? ; ,?PP. ea re.d on; Jjehalf : of.plaintiff, and Mr; , Blair; for defendants,; ;, ' "'"•- ' '■■'■"';