SUPREME COURT.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 2062, 2 October 1880, Page 4

SUPREME COURT.

SXTTINaS IN CHAMBERS. Fsiday, Octobbb 1. [Before hi* Honor Mr Justice Johnston.] His Honor sat in the Court Chambers at 11 a.m. BB EUGENE BIBBKL. Ou the application of Mr Holmes for Mr Thompson, his Honor made an order of discharge. ES DSHD CP ABBAKBEMEKT OF BDSUSTON, gcndby AND CO. Mr Spademan applied heroin for an order declaring complete execution of deed. The matter stood over for filing of an affidavit fcy Mr Spackman, that the firm had been trading in the district for six months. BOYD Y PAULINO. In this case a rule Tif.tr had been obtained by defendant, calling on the plaintiff to show cause why execution herein should not be stayed, and leave given to plead. Mr Spackman, for the defendant, now applied to be allowed to file an affidavit denying the truth of that filed by the plaintiff tr. reply. His Honor declined to grant the request. Mr Joynt, for the plaintiff, before showing cause, submitted that that the rule must be dismissed, as not being in accordance with the third general rule, as the order did not set out the grounds. His Honor said that no doubt Mr Joynt was correct; but where a person could not be misled he did not think that it was necessary to enforce the strict letter of the rule. Mr Joynt said he had strong grounds for (Biging the rule being carried out. In the cases of Biohmond’s Trustees v McEnerney and Par--fcar, his Honor had dismissed the rule, with costs, because of the laches of the defendant during the eighteen das a. This was a similar caoev and no explanation had been given of (the laches in this case. Eia Honor ruled that Mr Spackman not having complied with the rules, the rule nisi mast be discharged with costs. BE FSANK MAJOE, DECEASED. Mr Harper having filed an affidavit as to the detached sheet of the will being signed at the cams time, his Honor granted probate to W. H, Paddicombe as executor. WILSON T DBAPITB, CHABTHSS AND CO. Mr Holmes applied for an order settling issues. The defendants did not appear by counsel. After some argument, Mr McOonnel appeared for defendants. Mr Holmes said he would accept the issues of defendants if Mr McOonnel would accept a few alterations therein. The issues proposed by defendants, with come alterations, were then settled, and the trial fixed by special jury for the January sittings at Christchurch. OBBDITOB3 1 TBUBTBE.S OF CEABTEEK T OEABTBBE. rjy Holmes applied herein for an order changing the solicitor of defendant. Mr McOonnel stated the reasons why he fcq-3, withdrawn from the case, and objected to fho order being made until ha had been paid bis coots. 'After some argument, His Honor made an order changing the solicitor ca the record to Mr Holmes. STUD HOLME T BHODEB. In this case an order was made on application of Mr Girrick making Mrs W. Barnard Rhodes a plaintiff herein. BE W. CABTBB, DECEASED. Mr Cottorill applied heroin for letters of administration to W. H. Carter, the son of deceased. His Honor made the order as prayed. BOEINSON’S TEUSTBBS T BOBINSON AND OTHEE3. Mr Joynt applied herein for an extension of time of return to summons. His Honor made the order. LUMSD3N T TIM ABU BUILDING- SOCIETY. Mr Bruges applied herein for an order granting re-entry to the Timoru Building Society of promises mortgaged by Lumsden to them. His Honor made an order that the mortgagee have possession, unless in four weeks from date all interest, principal and costs be paid. BE BLBANOB COBBY, DECEASED. Mr Spackman applied for letters of administration herein to John Oordy. His Honor made the order, BE JESSE DATIS, DECEASED. Mr Salter applied herein for letters of administration to Elizabeth Ann Davis. His Honor made the order. BE B. a. HANKINS. Mr Salter, for Mr Stringer, applied for the discharge of the debtor. His Honor made the order. BE B HAMILTON. On the application of Mr Salter a similar order woe made herein. SITTINGS IN BANCO. LITTLB (APPELLANT) V BEADBHAW (BHbpondbnt). This was a ciae on appeal from the decision of Mr Gurnets | Resident J Magistrate at Ashburton. The appellant sued the respondent tn the Court below for £lO on an order for payment of money drawn by one Fisher on the respondent. It appeared that the order was drawn for £2O, of which £lO was paid, the respondent refusing to pay the other £lO. The Resident Magistrate nonsuited the ' plaintiff in the Court below, now respondent, On the ground that there was not a sufficient acceptance by the respondent of the order by Fisher. Mr Harper for the appellant. Mr O’Reilly for the respondent. Mr Harper submitted that this was an assignment of a chose in action, and quoted authorities in support of his contention. [Oases cited, Buck v Robson, 48, L.J.Q B.] His Honor said there was no evidence in the case that respondent owed Fisher £2O at all. Mr Harper submitted that even if this were so the order was a bill of exchange. His Honor pointed out that this being so there was no acceptance in writing. Mr Harper said he could not support the appeal. His Honor said ho was of opinion that the Magistrate was right, and he should dismiss «ho appeal. £B DEBS OF ASSIGNMENT OF HOOFEB, AITKBN AND CO. £n this case a rule nisi bad been obtained, calling upon the trustee to show cause why George Hooper should not be allowed to prove his debt as against the’estate, which had been disallowed by the trustee. Mr Garrick appeared for the trustee, and to show causa against the rule. Mr Joynt for Mr Hooper and in support of the role. Mr Garrick wished to refer to the deed of partnership of the firm, but Mr Joynt objected to it being put in without proper affidavit of the execution of the ■ftoed, and declined to admit anything. Mr Garrick then applied for and obtained an adjournment till next banco sitting. MCKEE T CHAMPION AND ANOTHEB. Mr George Harper applied for an order appointing a guardian for the infant defendants in the suit. Hie Honor made the order. This concluded the banco list. BCOINALD OBTON, APPELLANT, V JOHN HCYBT BAIKD AND ANOTHEB, EB3PONDBNTS. This was an appeal from the decision of the H.M., Timaru. Mr Stringer for appellant, Mr Harper for respondent. It appeared that the respondents had sued the appellant for the sum of £25 upon an erder given upon the appellant, but which had cot been stamped as required by the Stamp Acts. The RM. gave judgment for the moouot claimed, holding that the document might bo stamped after execution upon payment of the fine, and Orton appealed. Me Stringer quoted sections 53, 58, and 59 of the Stamp Act, 1875, and Candy v Marriott, 1 B. and Ad., 696. Mr Harper replied, contending there was no appeal, quoting Pearson v Clark, Mae. K.XB. His Honor held that this was not a more qucolion of evidence, but that the respondents having based their claim upon the order itself •must stand or fall by it. He could not see fcow the respondents could get over the sections of the Stamp Act relied upon by the appellant, and therefore would allow the appeal with costs.

The cheapness of English bookbinding is shown by the fact that a thousand volumes belonging to the Aetor Library, New York, wore sent over last year, and returned, handsomely bound, at » coat, including all charges, considerably less than would have been charged in Now York.