SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3013, 15 October 1872, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

NISI PIUUS SITTINGS.

Tins Dav. (Before Mr Justice Chapman.)

The ease of the Bank of New Zealand v. Larnach Avas, by consent, adjourned to December 2. Mr Smith applied that the case of Aitken v. Pritchard, Avhieh stood first on the list*of special jury eases, might be postponed until after .a utter v, Pritchard, as it was alleged the latter involved a question of title, Avhich it Avas intended to raise also in the iirstmentioned action, Avliicb is one for malicious prosecution; and that the defendants in Nutter v. Pritchard was likely to bo preju, diced by that matter being so discussed. After argument, His Honor said ho bad pOAver to do this. If in the case of Aitken v. Pritchard collateral questions Avere raised not necessary to a decision in it, but which might prejudice the defendant in Nutter v. Pritchard, be bad power to stop the case and postpone it, H any circumstances of that kind arose he could postpone the case. Mr Smith thought that course was very inconvenient; and was only resorted to in extreme eases. His Honor said the practice Avas not imfrcquei.t. He was, however, under a strong impression that the trial of Aitken v. Pritchard could iu no Avay prejudice the question or questions raised in N utter v. Pritchard, and therefore thought he ought not to grant the application. GALLON V. CAMERON AND ANOTHER. Mr Stout for the plaintiff, Robert Gallon ; Mr Taylor, with him Mr Cato more, for tho defendants, Alexander Cameron and John MTntosh. Tile declaration stated that on May 26, 1869, plaintiff demised by deed to the defendants a piece of land at Lovell's Flat for coal-mining purposes; that the latter worked it, and retained possession until the expiration of the term of lease, but that they retained possession thereafti r to tbe plaintiff s loss, whereby bo claimed L2ii(] damages. The defendants, by their pleas, denied that they bgd executed tbe deed, or that they either Avorked the mine or retained possession of it after the expiration of their tenancy \ and further, that they obtained permission from the plaintiff to remain on the land for twenty-one days, to enable them to remove buildings, &e. The facts shortly stated are these :—ln terms of the lease, defendants entered into possession and Avorked the coal mine, and at the end of their tenancy Gallon called for tenders for leasing it, because there was a

clause in the lease by which he was to give defendants a preference over other applicant#. But defendants’ tender was SO much Tower than the highest one sent in, that he refused to re-let it to them. Defendants refused to give up possession, and worked the mine for two days after the expiration of the lease, compelling Gallon to sue out a writ in the .Supreme Court, which having been done, they ceased work and gave up possession. For the plaintiff merely nominal damages wore a u ked. r i he jury found for the plaintiffs— damages LI IDs 6d’, being the amount of royalty clue to Gallon on the coals aaised by the defendants during the time they held possession of the mine beyond their lease. BRIDGE V, MACLARN. This is an action for slander, damages being claimed at LSOO. Mr Macasscy for plaintiff; Mr Stout for defendant. The alleged slander was that the defendant had told Sergeant Smith, at Arrowtown, that “ Bridge had killed a white steer of mine at Beer’s yard, ten or twelve days ago, and 1 have been told he cut up the hide.” Defendant denied malice by his pleas ; said he merely stated that lie heard “ Bridge had a hide in his possession with a hand cut out; and in evidence denied that he ever said plaintiff killed his steer. It was proved that the steer which Bridge killed was his own property. The jury found for the plaintiff—damages, L 25,