LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2117, 7 April 1914, Page 8

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT. RENTS OF CORPORATION LEASES ■■'■ I COUNCIL FAILS. PRESENT VALUATIONS TO STAND Tho Wellington City Council's application to tho Supreme Court to have tho valuations of six corporation leases set aside has failed. Decision to this effect was given by His Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) yesterday. ■ ' Properties Affected, These six properties and, their valuations are as under: — Section 155 to Customhouse Quay, 40ft. by 66ft. lOin., £2 os. per.foot; and Section 15(3, 45ft. by tiGit. lOin. to Customhouse Quay and Braudou Street, £3 15s. per foot. (Aitten, Wilson, and Co.). Sectitm 98, 35ft. frontage to Lambton Quay by a depth of 70ft., £5 10s. ' per foot, and Section 114, 30ft. frontage to Johnston Street, by a depth of of 801't. (Kirkcaldie aud Stains'). Section U2a, 32ft. 6in. frontage to Panama Street by a depth of 80ft., £3 per foot (Hall and Knight). Section 66c, 30ft. frontage to Latnbton Quay by average depth ot 80ft.; part oE 65a, lift. 9in. frontage to Panama Street and depth of 36ft. Tin.. £4 per foot (George and Kersley). Section 64 a, 43ft. 4in. frontage to Lambton Quay by a depth of 79ft. . fronting Panama Street, and 66tt. | on other boundary, average depth 7Uft., £5 per foot. Grounds of Application. The grounds put forward under the council's notices of motion were: (1) That two of the arbitrators did not net judicially under the reference, but were biased in favour of tho tenants; (2) that they fixed a rental grossly under what, iu tho circumstances s a prudent, lessee would pay: (3) grounds disclosed in affidavits sot'out. Theru was no suggestion that tho two , arbitrators won't beyond their jurisdiction in any way, and, further, no personal charge was made against them of judicial corruption. ' The ground really was that tho rents were so low that, had they been fixed by a jury, it would hove been said that tho verdict was perverse. How Far Can tho Court- Intervene? In the courso of. his judgment' His Honour said that the rentals were certainly lower and were irreconcilable With the decision of the D.I.C. arbitration, the umpire in that case having been a Judgo of tho Court. If the awards were proper, then the Government valuation cf land in the centre of Weilington was far beyond what it should be, and people who had be-light laud near the centre had been giving absurdprices. But had the Court power, to deal with an award by arbitrators as if it wero a verdict of a jury? It was necessary to state what was tho function of tlio Court in dealing with awards. Tho Court could sot awards I aside on many grounds. A distinction was made between an award of an arbitrator appointed by tho Court (whoso award had to bo approved and enforced by the Court) and the award of a tribunal created by the parties to ail award. This award was of the latter class. It was under the head of ims- ■ conduct that counsel for tie corporation sought to bring this case. Tlie Court had, however, to start with the admission that no imputation was made against tho personal conduct of tlvo two" arbitrators, nor was any improper motive imputed to them. Tho ground was that their finding was so contrary to eyidenco that they must have teen unconsciously biased. It was. of course, recognised that there might be legal misconduct in an arbitration enabling the Court to set aside an award without imputing the slightest improper mo* tivo to the arbitrator The question, therefore, sai'd His Honour, should be; "Can tho fact that too little, rent hag been awarded be a proof of partiality?" Ho failed to see ho\y iL could bft said that this proved partiality or misconduct. His Honour accordingly decided that, as there was no, appeal by statute against the decision, 'the.CouVt had no jurisdiction to interfere, ami tho motion must therefore bo refused. He allowed- £30 costs (for all eases), and this costs of printing, and tho fees of tlio Court. STRANGE CASE.

. GIRL AND HER STEPFATHER. MOTHER INTERVENES. Under Now Zealand law a girl of seventeen years is an infant. -This point was decided by the Supreme Court yesterday morning in a peculiar case in which a mother applied for the custody of her daughter. The applicant was Mary Jano Dell, who wished to have her i daughter removed from tlve house of a man who was her husband and tho girl's stepfather. r lhe caso was heard on Saturday last, when Mr. A. Dimn, who appeared ta support the application, based ill's case on the contention that "tho girl was aft 1 "infant," because she was not twentyone years old. ' [ Mr. J. M. Dale, who appeared for Arthur Dell (tho stepfather) tirged that the girl was not ail "infant," .and was her own mistress, because die was over sixteen years of age. That, lie said, was the English law, and he added that tho New Zealand law was- similar/ His Honour said that, by our law, tho Court might (on the application of tho mother of any infant) make sucli order as it thought fit regarding custody. He held that' an infant was any child, up to tho age of 21 years. Our statute gavo the widest power to th-n Supreme, Court to deal with tho custody of infants (up to 21 years), and he knew of no .fa-.v which compelled tho Court to do what a girl of'sixteen-or seventeen asked. No doubt cases would arise in which the wishes of young children would be considered and 'yielded to. The Court must, I however, exercise its discretion, awl not be bound by the views of the infant. The Court had first of all to consider the welfare of the eJiilrl—that had to i>s placed above tho feelings oi the guardians or parents. If, uowever, tho welfare of the child ckimwdod the iiiterferenco of tho Court, then tho Court had power, and it wsis its duty to look after the child. In this caso the Court would not bo doing its duty \vero it not to interfere to save the girl .Tgainst herself and tho most disgraceful eumlifefc of her stepfather. The only difficulty hero was that the mother had no means to look after the girl. She liiid, ?»«•- ever, arranged to put her in the* Salvation Army Homo, and in the meantime the child must go there. If a prouer place could bo found for the girl in a country district, away from tho stepfather, application could be wade to tiie Court for permission for Ifcr to go there. In # the meantime tho jiii-1 would have to'go to the Salvation Army Home. THE COURT OP APPEAL. . LIST OF CASKS. The-court of Appeal opened its session in WelliliEtoLi yesterday. Tin , ; Bench consisted ~o£ their Honours tlie Chiei

Justice (Sir Kobert. StoutV,'Mr. Justic? |. ; Denniston. Mr. Justice* Edwards', and.,!;. Mr. Justice, Sim.S.Tho first l!u> Court was --tho ftsmg oh datesvtor, iiearing , eases. .Suv.Jar.itheVifcUowjua lixturos have, beoii made.:---? , .,-..;■■ v-^-JvV. A pril ■ 7—Attorney-General. and -others. (Mr!, Marthi) . v., Mary, (Mr. Xenve). ■ : ■:^ : --&?'&'-i'?"- : s x " , l*' n '"'i:, April S—Kopata Ranapiri (Mr..? read-; well)' vl- tho- rubiie,Tnistee"(Mr; ;;Macdonnld). ■ ■ ■'■ ■•■' '■■■■~ ■>:<■■■'■', ~ ■'' : April 20— rights and Co.. (Mr. Young) v. Leyiji;>< and';.C!o. ; -(Mr. Diilziell). ' • ":■ ■ '■"~.'f^SA^ :^''; ..';•■'i .; ' Tho following cases,*; also; -/are set down to be : heard;. but the Court has not iixed definite dates for them:—Frederick Ashton Price' and others <Mr. Chapman) v. Charles Henry Hill and others (Mr.-: Hatltiokl): Charles Henry Kiim r'Jlr. Hadfield) v. the King; AHfttrick and Co., Ltd., (Mr. Morison) v. John Alexander Ketlpnth and others (Mr. Treadwell); William Nichol (Mr. Treadwell') v. Thomas Agaug (Mr. Cook); John Batg«r (Sir: Gray) r. Kobertson Bros. (Di'. Bamford) l Frank Harris and John Clifford Eestell (Mr. Bell) v. E-ora Hakarflira <Mr. Loughnaa); Bichard Webb Jenkins (Mr, Dalzicll) v. the Public Trustee (Mr. Macdonald). Law Practitioners Act ve Walter Shaw (Mr. Hunter); Arthur Johnston Htie* ston (Mr. MacDiarmid) v. Frederick Bdwiu Bishop Lovelock (Mr.- Stewart). The list for the Full Court is:—Justin McCarthy (Mr. Johnston) r. William Madden- (Mr. Harper); same v. Edward Worthington -, same v. Alexan-. dor M'Doiwld; aud'same v. Charks Horwoll. ; CUftTY Of! NOT? ■-• MEANING! OF JURY'S FI?i»INC4. Tho Court was occupied most of the ds.v with the appeal of Henry Holland (which is reported in another portion of this issue), but late in the afternoon it dealt with the case of Alfred William glared. . '. In December last Aldred Was tried on a charge of his hpring set iire to a ] house. His Honour air. Justico Sim, who presided- at tho trial, directed the jury that thero was no evidence before; the'ni as to the man's mental condition. : Tho jury found the man guilty, but added a rider that ho was not responsible for his actions at the time. i Mr. E. F. Von Haast, who appeared for the prisojier, contended that tho jury's finding was really a.way of say- | imi that they desired to bring Aldred in i not guilty on the ground of insanity. Ji the Court did-not agree with that contention, lie would submit that tbcro should be a new trial. Mr. J. W. Salmonf], E.G.* SolicitorGenera*, submitted that the finding was a verdict of guilty. Tho Court reserved 'decision. BiAGISJRATE'S COURT, BICYCLE LEFT OUTSIDE CLUB, Before Mr, D. G. A. Cooper, S.M,, at the Magistrate's Court yesterday, Berni aid Steen, a trimmer, was charged with the theft of a bicycle, valued at &i, tho property of John Burgess. Mr. PJackson appeared for ' accused, who pleaded not guilty. Chief-Detective liroberg conducted the prosecution. • Evidence was given to the effoet that, on February 20,' John Btirgcss had loft his bieyclo Wside tho Working Men's Club, and entered that building. Oβ ilis return the- machine was missing. 1 'Accascd d«in'ed the theft, a»d stated that he. had brought the bieyclo out ■ from England with him. Chief-Detective Brobcrg remarked that bicycle thefts wero very common, and it was hard to detect the thieves. Tho Magistrate imposed a fine of £4, j with.costs/265., in default one month ia gaol.TUI STREET DIBEOGLIO. Oft (Saturday, March 28, traublo occurred in Tui Street, aad as a, result LeHora Parker, Theresa Eusscll/ Janifts Malcolm, aud Harry Tawsra appeared in tho dock yesterday to answer charges . 1 <;«icsriiii-ag tho disturbance, tho four offenders mentioned were jointly charged with the theft of a purse and £1 18s. in money, the property, of Margaret Webb. Accused were r theii individually charged as follow: —Lenora Parker, damaging a lock .valued at 4s. M., the property of Rupert Victor Perrett;- Theresa .Russell, damaging a pane of glass,, valued at 35., the property of E. V.Perrett; Jam'cs Malcojm, assaulting B-- V. Perrett; and Harry Tafflin, assattitirig Margaret Webb. Mr. H. P. D'Loeiy appeared for Tainin, wlio' pleaded hot ginlty to hoth. charges, and Mr. P. Jackson repre* seated the -ether thrao accused, who de* nied the theft of the purse aiid money, tat admitted the) other charges. After hearing evidence- of a sordid nature, the Magistrate dismissed tlio charge of theft against all four" acciased, Tho other cases were deal! with as follow:—Lonorit Parker was , ordered to pay the cost of tho"damaged; look; Theresa Kussell to make good the- value of t!i-a pane- of glass; .James Malcolm fined £2 for assaulting Perrett; and Harry Tamin fined a like sum for assatilt'iiig the Woman Webb, in the first two cases the default was fijeed at three days' imprisonment, and : in the assajilt cases accused-were each given the option of spoading one month in gaol.

MAINTENANCE CASES. Benjamin Bad© was ordered to pay ss. per'week towards fie maintenance of Charles Morris Harris; Edmund James Curtice to pay ss. a week towards tl» maiirtoimicc of Violet 0. 0. Curtice; i Gerald 2caty to pay 7s. 6d. per week < towards the maintenance of his iilegiti-: mate child. Stephen Cairns was order- j ed to. find £200 as surety for the maintenance of Amy Cairna, and was also sentenced to one month's imprisonment in the Auckland gaol, the warrant, to be suspended on payment of arrears. MISCELLANEO D S • Charles Ciiarleivood was' further remanded until to-morrow on a charge of having stolen 15 cwt. of copper ana one drum of tar, valued in ail at £3!) 65., the property .of the Westport . Coal Company. Bail was allowed in the sum of £'2-5. Jessie M'Ewsn, aged 52 years, pleaded guilty to a chargo of having escaped from the Salvation Attiiy Home. >She was sentenced to fourteen . days' imprisonment, and ordered to ho placed in the home uiwii tho expiry of'tho sentence. The accused loft the. dock with the remark, "I will not go bach to the home." For threatening behftviour, Sidney Brooker and Henry were oath fined £2, with the alternative of fourteen days' imprisonment. A fine of £2 was imposed on Thomas Small, who pleaded guilty to a charge of being; an idle and disorderly person. On a similar chafgv? Catherine Malkiri, alias Smith, was sent to gaol for one month. . , Frank Walker was fined £2, in default fourteen days' imprisonment, for making use of objectionable language. For a" like offence Mary Johnston was .fined a similar amount. For insobriety Ruby Kirk (alias I'rosscrV Bartholomew ' Mtihoney, Frank Adair, and Win. Barker wore each filled £1. For a like offence Elisabeth Murray and Chaa. Anderson were each fined ]os. Nine first offenders were leniently dealt with. Frederick Radlolf, who pleaded guilty io a. cliiiixe- of having entered the Cricketers' Anna Hotel, whert swell premises were required to he cfos.ed, was fined os.