SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3644, 27 October 1874, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTINGS.

Tuesday, October 27. (Before His Honor Mr Justice Chapman and a Special Jury.) Dodsckv v. Macandrew.— This case was continued at eleven o’clock this morning. Mr Macassey called Alexander J. Willie, Under-Secretary and Clerk to the Executive Council, who enumerated the members of the Council in January last. Vv itness had been subpoenaed to produce the minute book of the Council, but had not done so, the Superintendent having so instructed him. There were no entries in that book relative to the matters of this action. William Woods, accountant in the Provincial Government service and in 1873 cashier in the same, said he used to daily receive money from Mr Williamson and others on account of receipts from the Port Chalmers tine. The first amount he received was on April 25, 1873. and amongst others there was a sum of L 272 on November 11. These amounts were placed to the credit of the Provincial account at the Bank of New Zealand, William Conyers, Manager of Otago Bailways, said he had held that office since May 19 of the present year. [He produced the cash-book of his department, but Mr Smith objected to his mentioning anything about the items contained in it.] John Hyde Harris, sol.citor to plaintiff in this action, said he was formerly agent for Mr Mansford. He had received from the latter, by post, the drsft of a lease between plaintiff and Messrs Proudfoot and Co., but could not find that document anywhere; although a search had been made. Cropsexamiued : Witness bad handed the draft to Mr Mapassey, but the latter had returned it. Witness knew it was returned* to his office, but did not see it returned. T. A Mansford was recalled. Mr Smith objected to witness’s giving evidence as to this document, which could not be found, and remarked that there was “ such a thing as pretending that a document is lost.” Mr Macassey : J hat’s a pretty observation to make 1 His Honor; What was that? I did not hear it, so let the matter drop. 1 think the evidence .s inadmissible in this case. John Leys (known as the “ Major”) said on the Bth January Mr Turton came into the refreshment reom at Port Chalmers, and while he showed a piece of paper the bailiffs got behind witness and “ helped him out.” (Laughter.) He was very roughly used, put out without his hat and coat, and the bar shut. He was away a quarter-of-an-hour to tell Mrs Dodson what had happened, and during that time all the things had been throw n out in a heap. Daniel Kolfe said it took two hours to clear out the things, which were carefully handled.

Mr Turton stated when he went to the refreshment room on January 8 be asked l eys to look at the photographs he had with him. Leys replied that he* could not see them unless they were handed to him, and he went to the light. Witness asked him to go outside, as the light would be stronger, and as he did so the doors were. suddenly closed by the bailiffs, who were inside. Witness remained on the platform while the things were being taken out, doing which occupied two hours, and engaged eight men, besides the bailiffs. Leys was not touched by anybody. If the latter said he was pushed out or roughly treated, or that witness called him “Major,” he stated what was grossly incorrect. It was entirely a dodge of witness’s, asking him to go outside. Leys told witness he had played him a mean trick, that he would get the sack, and that they expected this to happen. The things were carefully cleared out. Eighteen shillings would cover any damage done. T. 11. Dodson estimated the stock and fittings, on January $, as worth L6OO Witness assessed the beer at L 33 a hogshead—LlO cost price, the balance being required to keep the establishment up. On January 7, waited at the refreshment-room from 11 p,m. till 1 a.m. oa the Bth to give up possession, if Mr Rolfe gave security that the things would not be disturbed, but the latter did not pat in an appearance.

The case had not concluded when wo went to press.