THE LAW’S UNCERTAINTY.

Evening Star, Issue 2906, 12 June 1872, Page 3

THE LAW’S UNCERTAINTY.

About twenty-five years ago a new dead and buried city i 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 the 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 section, who says that the son now claiming the property has no right to it, inasmuch that he is nnable to prove that he was born in wedlock. The son said not to have been born in wedlock goes to law against the son of the father who bought the section. The jury declares he is born in wedlock, and that the land belongs to him, and all that is upon it. One would think this would end the disp te; not a bit of it, for it is hardly commence 1. The beaten son 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 either of the claimants. Injunction to argument is granted (costs altogether up to this point L 482 6s Bd.) Now another claimant comes forward who says that 26 years ago he took a mortgage over the land which was sold by the one father aforesaid to the other hereinbefore mentioned, who willed it to his son ; but he had not registered the mortgage because he held collateral security in the shape of an acceptance which he had endorsed over to a third party who had died intestate before the bill matured. A writ is now issued in prohibition, and lawyers are puzzled to know how the case stands, although their clerks are nob in entering costs. There have been arguments in demurrer, making the costs amount in all to L 572 6s 4cl; rules nisi, applications for specific relief, interpleaders, non pros and more arguments in banco, which have added L 292 14s 4d more to the expenses previously incurred in the proceedings. There is a good deal more yet to be done, and the dispute it is thought will be brought to a termination some time towards tho end of 1880. This is “banco.” The pioperty under the litigation is worth about L 350 By the time it has been decided who shall have it, over L 2,000 will have been paid m law expenses. Glorious thing banco is, is it not? Nearly as expensive as horseracing, but not balf so exciting.