Halcombe and Snerwill v W. Whisker

Feilding Star, Volume V, Issue 32, 18 March 1884, Page 2

Halcombe and Snerwill v W. Whisker

TO THE EDITOB OF THE STAB. Sir,— l have read the article m your paper of the 14 h inst. entitled "A Double- Barrelled Verdict," and: also Mr Staite's letter in answer thereto, which appeared in your issue of Saturday, in which, iv the interests of his client, he makes a vain endeavor to bolster up a most- rotten judgment. Mr Staile virtually admits that the order was not accepted, and points out that in a late statute, power is given to the'R.M. to look at a case in an equitablelight. No doubt such a power is given in "The EM. Act of 1867," but, sir, the evidence given at the hearing of this case proved that Halcombe and Sherwill had agreed to give the defendant credit only for so much money as should, on a settlement of the affairs of Jones' estate, be found to be coming to Mr Wright -that Mr Wright had agreed to accept whatever there was coming, no Aiattcr how Utile -that it was doubtful if there would be sufficient moneys in the estate, after liquidating prior claims, to pay Mr Wright anything. Yet, in the face of all this, the h.M. compels the plaintiffs to give the defendant credit ; for moneys which in all probability will- never be received. Should the order in dispute be not paid by the trustees of Jones' estate, the plaintiff* miis.' lose the amount of the order (I*7 ls 8d). Where, sir,, is tbe equity? — I ant, &c, W. A. Sandilands. Feilding, March 17ih. 1884.