SUPREME COURT.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 2020, 14 August 1880, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.

SITTINGS IN CHAMBERS. Ehiday, August 13. [Before His Honor Mr Justice Johnston.] His Honor sat in the Court Chambers at 11 a.m.

BB WH. AIF2ED NECK, DECEASED. Mr Turnhull moved herein for administration to Paul Von Nock, £0 the eldest eoh of deceased. His Honor made the order. BTUDHOIME T BfIODSS. Mr Garrick applied for an order directing psyment out of Court of £38.353 3s 3d. Mr Maude appeared to consent, and the order was made. BANK OP NEW SOUTH WALS3 T POSTLBTH WAITS AND COX, In this case Mr Garrick produced minutes of decree as settled. Mr Helmore appeased for defendants to consent. The order was made. BB JAMBS "FOBSYTHS, DBOEASBD. Mr Loughnan applied for an order granting administration herein to the son of deceased. His Honor made the order. BE JOHN MCIiENNAN, A DSBTOB. Mr Salter applied for an order authorising the trustee herein to seize oertain property of the bankrupt held by one Edwin Denet of Hororata, and compelling the debtor to give up certain property. His Honor pointed out that the property was that of the trustee under the Aot, and he could take it without the necessity of taking out an order. The bankrupt could be brought np to show cause why he should not be attached for his conduct. The order, as regarded the power to seize would be made, but he did not see what better the trustee would be for the order to get possession of the goods from the bankrupt. Mr Salter said that the trustee was not empowered to seizs by force, though the Registrar was. Hia Honor said it was very strange that there *as no proviaioa for the trustee to seize by force. Mr Salter said that the bankrupt had ascaulted the trustee's representative most violently, and prevented the purchaser from being placed in possession of the property. His Honor said that if this was not an ■offence under the Bankruptcy Act it certainly was oontempt of Court, and the bankrupt oould be sent to prison for it. He would make the order as prayed, authorising the trustee to seize the goods alleged to be in the hands of one Denet, end another order calling upon the bankrupt to show cause why he should not be attaohed, unless within seven days he handed over possession of the property. WILSON V DBAFBB, CHABTEBS AND CO. This was a case in which the plaintiff sought to recover from the defendants oertain books of acoount and a promissory note of £2500 made by one Thos. Wilson in favor of the plaintiff. The defendant's answer was that the books of account, &c, were detained until the cost of an arbitration, amouating to ioms £540, was paid by the defendant. The plaintiff now asked for tho production of these books of account as material to the conduct of the action. Mr Holmes appeared for the plaintiff, and in support of the rule calling upon the defendants to show cause why they should not give np the said books. Mr McOonnel appeared for the defendants and contrary to the rule. He submitted that the affidavits filed in the Court in answer to the interrogatories put by the plaintiff to the defendant. His Honor said that the plaintiff should have asked for a discovery in his declaration, which was not the case. Mr McConnel submitted that the question as to what books they had, which was now asked, had already been answered by him. After some argument, His Honor made an order directing the defendants to discover to the plaintiff such letters, entries, papers or writings as might be necessary to show the authority given to detain the books, until a oertain amount was paid, alleged to have been signed by the defendant Charters, as agent for the plaintiff. Costs to be oosts in the cause.