DISTRICT COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3744, 22 February 1875, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

Monday, February 22. (Before his Honor Judge Bathgate.) Maclean Brothers v. Daniel M'Donald and others.— ln this case, an action to recover the price of three bullocks, his Honor gave judgment for plaintiff, with costs. Garrick v, Pyke, —This case, adjourned irom last sitting of the Court, was continued to-day. Plaintiff claimed L2OO, for money lent, and for part share in the ‘Southern Mercury.’ Defendant admitted that part salary was due, and a smal 1 sum for travelling expenses. Mr Barton appeared for plaintiff, Mr Haggitt for defendant. J ohnW esley J ago, manager at the Evening bTAR office : I remember having a conversation with defendant with reference to his starting the ‘Southern Mercury.’ The calculations on the paper produced are in ray handwriting. [Mr Barton objected to evidence on this point, unless the document were connected with plaintiff. Defendant was accordingly put iuto the box, and gave the foil Giving' evidence:*—l re* coi»ed t.;o document from Jago, and showed it to plaintiff. I had previously asked the latter to draw up a calculation as to the cost of a paper, but ho was incapable of doing so. Ho sat down one evening and jotted down some figures (also produced), but could not draw up an estimate. When I showed him Jago’s, he whipped it out of my hand and copied it in his pocket book. I never had any other estimate of the cost of a paper but this.—Crossexamined : I am positive that the second document was written by plaintiff in mv presence man hotel, ami if the latter swears that he did not do so I shall say ho has a bad memory. I do not see any of my writing in it. All plaintiff over was to mu was a servant on salary, *aml I never contemplated any other arrangement with him. I showed him the estimate because lie bad represented himself to be a man ot great literary ability. I know then that lie was incapable of drawing up an estimate, and yet I asked his advice. I did a worse thing—l engaged him, I did think he was a competent man to advise mo as to starting on Jago’s estimate, and that ho was a good newspaper authority. The Star’s estimate was for i9s Cd a week, and the ‘Mercury’ was printed at that office. I made arrangements with them to publish the paper on that basis. | (Witness frequently appealed to bis Honor ns to whether lie must answer some of Mr Barton’s questions, as ho was not in a bankruptcy court, but the questions wore allowed.)]—J. W. Jago, ro called : That estimate shows the cost of pro- i (hieing a weekly paper, exclusive of editorial and nmtmgeml expenses. I was connected

« « V° f t !l e 3a ™ e i 1<; would not require ‘ i 1115 for tke Purpose of a contract, but warilq d s contract followed some time after~F asked for such an estimate I should irate . Jea l°hwaß ‘stickingout.” Thatisauestior.what the Star would produce a weekly Di'iiT^ nCI 1B 11 ot a general estimate.—Joseph di,n ™ n i«7°t Ve |' Beei ' at the Stak office : lu Ja- ’ & J 4 ; 1 was overseer, and the ‘ Mercury ’ it nnYW *1 °Y office * 1 was the Printer of offinp 1 Viol ™ be in defendant’s 1 laintiff was m the office, and I had weeK U! i. Wit u him for tho firßt two Platfiff ah !. 0 * to the , work of the paper. " sed to supply me with copy and mit fo?4 ST ‘ A AT matteC , which was to be lifted Mercury.’ I don’t think he did Swl ?n i uv w? tkree weeks - that he used to publish the paper and send over advertisements and copy from defendant. He never told me he was or expected to become a partner Mercury.’ Y received orders from defendant, having been directed by him, in plaintiff s presence, not to receive any orders or instructions from plaintiff, as he “ made a regular mess of the commercial.” I told plaintiff of this order repeatedly, I was in defendant’s office one evening when, he spoke to plaintiff about money matters. It was in reference to the canvasser, bmith, who, it appeared by the conversation, had been sfcicking-up bills at hotels, and givmg orders on defendant to pay them with. Defendant told plaintiff “it was like 118 ' impudence to pay his money away on suc.i orders.” Plaintiff did not set no that he had any interest in these monies, nor "did he say anything at the time. [A letter was produced from plaintiff to defendant stating that omiuh had just added eighty or ninety subscribers to the Tokomairiro and Taieri list, and recommending that he should be kept on as canvasser,] If I were in plaintiff’s place I should not have paid Smith’s orders. I would have received any monies, but not paid any. 1 did not think from plaintiff’s paying the orders that he had any interest in the ‘ Mercury. I did not know the nature of the connection between plaiutiffand defendant. I have no hostility to plaintiff.—Re-examined: Smith’s outers were drawn on plaintiff, and defendant objected to plaintiff paying his money away on such orders. John James fitting, reporter on the ‘Guardian : Plaintiff was once on the staff of the Guardian, He left two or three times, once while defendant was absent. Mr Creighton, then editor, gave him notice, and gave instructions to me, as sub-editor, that ho was only to be taken on from week to week. The second notice of discharge was given by defendant, irlamtiff and I have had several conversations about this action and his claim, particularly nIV « , time , of his leaving the r Guardiau.’ [Mr Barton objected to evidence on the conversations, as plaintiff had not been examined with regard to them.—Mr Haggitt said he was unaware at that time that there had been such conversations. His Honor allowed the evidence, with the right of plaintiff’s counsel to reply. ] He told me he had an agreement with defendant, who did not carry it out ; and that, as he was leaving the office, he would take pio®®®dings against defendant. He asked me my opinion, and I said that, if his statement was conect, he had a contingent claim. He also said that he could not sue as a partner, as the agreement was not carried out. Afterwards ho added that he had gone to Messrs Barton and Sanders, and that they advised him to take it to the Supreme Court. I told him he should take it there if he could get more money. He was afraid he would not recover as a partner, as he had not paid in all the money he was to advance. After hearing further evidence, the case was adjourned, by consent of counsel, till Weduesday next.