VENNEL v. LEVER.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1970, 17 June 1880, Page 3

VENNEL v. LEVER.

At the Resident Magistrate's Court yesterday the following civil oase was heard: — Vennell v. Lever, olaim £45, being the value of some horses entrusted to the defendant for sale. The plaintiff handed a written statement to the Bench, which set out that her husband, Vennell, had formerly lived at the Sandhills, but had mysteriously disappeared, and had not been heard of since the sth August last. The circumstances, whioh created a considerable sensation at the time, owing to suspicion of the man having been murdered, had been the subject of a lengthened police enquiry, but no trace of his fate has been discovered. The missing man had been living separate from his wife, to whom he paid an allowance, and appears, before his disappearance, to have made away with all his personal property except some horses, nothing else having been found at his hut, where he lived alone, his wife rooiding at Ohristchurch. Mrs Vennell fell into want, and gradually sold almost everything she had for subsistence. She placed the horses in the hands of the defondant, who was a trustee under the separation deed, for sale, whioh chargo be at first undertook, but afterwards declined either to sell or give them up to plaintiff. The horses were now in possession of a third party, who, plaintiff believed, was working them for his own benefit. Mr Slater said that the horses were lent by the defendant to save the expense of grazing, until some legal authority was given for their disposal. Defendant had no desire to retain the property, but it having come into his possession, he was now unable, with safety to himself, to dispose of it. There being no proof of the death of Vennel, Mrs Vennel could not administer to the estate. Matters wore complicated by the deed of separation. If the property were delivered to plaintiff, and' Vennol ever turned up alive, defendant would be liable to him for their value. Under the circumstances ho was compelled to apply for a nonsuit. His Worship agreed with Mr Slater that no other course was open, at the same time remarking upon the pitiful nature of Mrs Vennel's case. He suggested that the horses might be let out on hire, and the proceeds given to plaintiff as a help to her subsistence. Of course she had no legal claim to even this, but if Vennel was alive, and, reappearing, brought the matter into Court, no magistrate, he was sure, would allow defendant to suffer for his inhumanity. Mr Slater said if anything could bo done as pointed out by the magistrate, he would not put any obstacles in the a ay. Plaintiff nonsuited.