MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 2050, 18 September 1880, Page 2

MAGISTRATES’ COURTS.

CHRISTO RUROH. Friday, September 17. [Bafore GK L. MellUh, Eeq , B.M.] Civil Oases. Latter (Deputy Commissioner Land Tax) v Trustee in bankruptcy of the estate of A. J. Pyne (T. B. Oraig), £5 19s 9d, being land tax due for the halfyear ending Jnne 30th, 1880, on certain properties originally owned by the bankrupt. Mr Loughnan appeared for plaintiff, Mr Thomas for defendant. Defendant pleaded his nonliability on the ground that part of the property had been disposed of before ho was appointed trustee, and the rest shortly afterwards ; that the property had never been vested in him, nor had he dealt with it in any way. It was argued on the other side that when he was made trustee in the estate of the bankrupt, everything settled or in transit in that estate became vested in him, without any motion of bis own, and that the Land Tax Act provided a means of divesting himself of undue responsibility, of which he had not availed himself. The Act provided that change and proof of change of ownership, should be notified to the Deputy Commissioner. The conveyances of the properties sold had not been executed until after the date of the appointment cf defendant to the trusteeship, and no matter what his position was iu equity, in law he remained responsible until the conditions of the Act were fulfilled, Mr Mellish thought tho trustee could scarcely be held responsible for the lands sold previous to his trusteeship, and altogether it seemed that those who had bought the land and enjoyed it were properly liable for the, responsibilities that were entailed, Mr Thomas mentioned that by accidental obstructions the estate had not been wound up, so that funds were still in the hands of the trustee, and probably if the case were decided against him he would not suffer. If this had not been the case an adverse decision would have meant the personal loss of the trustee. There had been no intention to defraud or obstruct the collection of the revenue ; it was simply a matter of shifting the responsibility. Hia Worship, recognising the bona fidet of both parties, took time to consider his decision. Judgment deferred till the filet inst. J. Murphy v Jackson, £5 ISsj on a dishonored promissory note. Mr Salter appeared for the defendant. This case had been adjourned from the 16th instant. Mr Salter appeared for defendant. Murphy claimed for fifty bushels of oats at Is 8d per bushel, and fitty bushels of bran. The evidence showed that he had agreed to supply the oats at Is 6d per bushel, and had delivered short measure, six bushels in the oats and ten bushels in the bran. Ho also claimed for fourteen bushels of grass seed, which defendant alleged had not been ordered, but which was allowed by the Bench. An 1.0. H. for £4 10a had been given for the debt, besides the promissory note on which tbe action was taken. The hearing of the case occupied considerable time on both days, and after great patience the account was adjusted by the magistrate giving judgment for tbe plaintiff in the reduced amount of £3 6s with costs. At the same time he remarked upon the stupidity of the defendant and tho unbusinesslike character of the traffic carried on by the plaintiff, who appeared to have kept no books of any kind. Ford and Newton v Oonolley, £SO due for rent of the Heathoote Valley Hotel. Mr Harper for plaintiff, Mr Loughnan for defendant. This case had been adjourned from last week for argument on the point whether or not due diligence had been used by plaintiffs in presenting for payment a post-dated cheque given to them in part satisfaction of their claim. This cheque, according to plaintiffs, was held over beyond its date on the solicitation of defendant, and when presented was dishonored. Defendant denied having made the solicitation, and a remarkable conflict of evidence bad been heard as to this fact. Counsel on both sides had agreed to wipe out this evidence altogether, and the contention on this occasion was confined chiefly to tho hard legal construing of the properties of post-dated cheques, Mr Harper argued that such promises to pay being really on all-fours with bills of exchange were, like them, entitled to the operation of three days’ grace. This being granted the particular document under discussion had been presented within the proper time. Mr Loughnan met this by quoting authorities to show that no such privilege could be claimed by plaintiffs, and his Worship apparently concurring in this view, Mr Harper elected to take a non-suit so as to be enabled to faring the action on again. PLintiff non-suited accordingly with costs. Saturday, Septembeb 18. [Before GK L. Mellish, Esq., R.M.] Drunkenness. —For first offence two men were fined 5s and cabhire Is, Wm. Hutton, who was pronounced by a doctor to be suffering from tho effects of drink, was remanded till the 21st instant. Larceny.—John Kelly, who has just been let out of gaol after serving a three months’ term for a similar offence, was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment for stealing a demijohn, value 63, the property of Wm. Geddes, brewer, at Lincoln.