SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4096, 12 April 1876, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SESSIONS. Wednesday, April 12. (Before Mr Justice Williams and a Special July.)

C. E. Bird v. the National Bank of New Zealand is an action to recover LI,OOO for damages for giving notice improperly, as is alleged, of the dishonor of a cheque. The notice was to this effect“ Take notice, that a cheque drawn by C. E. Bird on the Colonial Bank for the sum of L 5 15s deposited by you iu this bank has been presented for payment and dishonored, ana is now charged to your account. Answer (this was left blank). —Mr Barton, with him Mr Stout, appeared for plaintiff; Mr Smith, with him Mr Stewart, tor defendant. The issues were :

1. Did tho plaintiff, on the 6th day of October, 1875, duly present the cheque in the declaration mentioned m the usual place and within the usual hours of business of the Colonial Bank of New Zealand ? 2. Was payment of the said cheque refused by the said Colonial Bank of New Zealand P 3. What damages (if any) is the plaintiff entitled to P

Mr Smith asked to strike out from the pleadings as immaterial the first paragraph, that the cheque was presented at the usual place and within the usual hours; and to put in the third pleading that plaintiff was a customer.

After considerable argument it was decided that the amendments be not made till after the facts of the case were disclosed. His Honor intimated that he was with Mr Smith on the first amendment, bun against him on the other.

Mr Barton rose to address the Coittrt, when

Mr Smith claimed the right to open the case, basing his right on a recent case— Dawson v. Mackay, action for libel, heard before Mr Justice Chapman. Mr Stout pointed out that in that case the ground of action was admitted by defendant, who published an apology before the case was brought in Court. At four o’clock counsel were arguing the right to begin.