SUPREME COURT.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2482, 21 March 1882, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

SITTINGS IN CHAMBERS. This Day. (Before his Honor Mr Justice Johnston ] His Honor sat in <\>nrt Chambers at 11 a.m. E* GEORGE TATLOB CLARKE. This matter stood over till next Chamber day. BE JOHN COTHBB, Th : s was a return to a summons calling npon Mr Hyams Marks to shew cause why he had not attended the trustee Mr Harper appeared to show cause. Mr Fisher for the trustee. Mr Harper said that Mr Marks had written to the trustee asking for an adjournment for a week to make up his accounts. His Honor said that the witness should have gone before the trustee, and asked for an adjournment instead of writing a letter. Mr Harper said they were now willing to go baiore the trustee and be examined. Mr Fisher said ha would be prepared to accept Mr Harper’s undertaking that the witness would come up for examination. His Honor pointed ont that it was a very different thing dealing with a trustee to two business men arranging with each other by letter. However, under the circnmctances, the undertaking of Mr Harper that Mr Marks wonld attend wonld be accepted, bnt as Mr Marks was in fault he would have to pay the costa. BE ARBITRATION OF A. J. TCDBALL AND J. E. INGLE. In this case, on the application of Mr Joynt, his Honor made an order for the order of submission to arbitration and enlargement of rule an order of Court. BE GEORGE TURNER CROFT. Mr Holmes applied herein for an order for the debtor's discharge. Mr Button applied on behalf of an opposing creditor whether he could oppose without the seven days’ notice having bean given. His client had overlooked the application for discharge, as it was appended to the notice calling the last meeting of creditors. His Honor pointed out that Mr Button had filed no affidavits in support of his application. Mr Button contended that under the Act he was entitled to tender the opposing creditor to be sworn. Mr Holmes said that no notice had been served npon the debtor of opposition within the time allowed by the rules. His Honor said ha wonld hear the creditor. The creditor, Mr Solomon Victor, appeared, and was examined by Mr Button. He deposed that he was a creditor for £ll on the estate of the debtor, and had proved his debt. He had overlooked the advertisement in the paper, and had gone to the trustee, who bad promised him to let him know when the application for discharge was published, but had not done so. George Turner Croft, the bankrupt, deposed that he filed in October last. His liabilities were set down at .£216 I s, and his assets at £6l 9 1. There was also a cottage which had since realised £35. Witness entered into an agreement to bnild a house for Mr Stoddart on the North east belt. The agreement waa entered into with Victor to do the glazing, &c , at the house, in August or the beginning of September, and then Victor did the most of the glazing about this time. Witness d d not four or five days before he filed allow Victor to spend a large amount of labor and material on the building. It was some three weeks before he filed that Victor ceased to work at the building. Witness had given an order to E. W. England to receive the money due to him on the bnilding, but, it was not signed by the proprietor. This was given at the commencement of the work to cover the supply of the timber. The order was for something over £2OO, not to receive all the money. When witness filed he owed England £126 in respect to the bnilding, and Mason and Strnthers £33. The order waa not signed by the proprietor, owing to the architect not having obtained his signature. Witness found that he had been drawn into the contract by the architect, and he had been led into taking a losing contract by the architect. He had found at the end of the job that be was losing, and had, therefore, to file. Be filed on a Monday, and on the Saturday previous ha received a cheque for £35, which he paid away for wages. The wages-sheet showing this expenditure had been laid before his trustee. Mr Stoddart had deducted some £l7 for fines from him, which, had he received, he won'd have paid Victor, because he was a working man. Soa.e four or five weeks before he filed be knew that he mast file, bat he kept on to pay the wages of the working men. By Mr Holmes —The reason why he went on with the bnilding to finish it was that it was more for the benefit of his creditors, because it wonld cost a great deal more to finish by the architect. He had not kept hack a copper of the mon*-y ho had received. Mr Stoddart had led him to believe that he would not enforce the £l7 fines. Had Mr Stoddart paid him in full, he should have paid Mr Victor. When he entered into the contract with Victor he was solvent, and thought he should come ont all right, but the architect working against him had entirely npset his calculations. Mr Victor had done the greater part of the work when he found he must file. Th c re waa only ene contract for the glazing. The cost of glazing the conservatory amounted to half the claim. Mr Victor, ro-examined by Mr Button —Witness was first employed six or seven weeks before the debtor filed. About a fortnight before he filed he came to afk witness to do the conservatory, and this work was finished on the Thursday as the debtor filed on the Monday. The material for the conservatory cost £6 15. Witness went on the Saturday to get his money, when the debtor told him he could not get the cheque till Tuesday, and on Monday he received a notice of the filing. The work of the conservatory took a day and a half. Cross-examined by Mr Holmes—Witness could not say whether Mr Hubbard, the architect, was living in the house when he finished the work. He was not aware that Mr Hubbard went into the house on the 29th September. His Honor said the bankrupt ought to have told Victor that ho conld not go on. At the same time it waa not a had case, but still ho could not discharge the bankrupt at once. The order would be for the discharge to take place at the expiration of three calendar months. MUBFIB V WILSON.

In this csee, wwicb was an fiction for seduct'on, Mr Joynt applied for the settlement of issues. His Honor pottled the issues. Case to bo tried by ccmmon ju-y at Christchurch. MB JOHN OIIMODR AND OTHERS. Mr Garrick applied, under section 71 of the Land Transfer Act, for an order authorising the surviving trustees to execute a tran-fer to their own names and that of Thomas Banks. In this case, by the insertion upon the certificate of title of the words “no survivorship” the trustees were unable to deal with the land except by application to the Court. They now came before the Court to get rid of this, and by order request the Registrar of Titles to consolidate the two certificates. His Honor made the order as prayed. The Court then rose.