DISTRICT COURT.

Grey River Argus, Volume VI, Issue 427, 8 October 1868, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

Tr/EspAY, October 6. (Before His Honor Judge Clarke.) Jules Guerin v. Hamilton and Nichol. -e-^This was an action for damages for false imprisonment, which had been withdrawn. The defendants applied for costs incurred up to the date of the withdrawal of the action, which were granted. IN" BANKRUPTCY. J. A. Whall.— This was an application for complete execution of a deed of assignment. Mr Guinness made the application. Mr Kenrick, Clerk to the Court, drew the attention of the. Court to the informal manner in which the deed had been signed. Agents had signed for a large number of the creditors, and in one case the principal had informed him that he had not authorised his agent to sign the deed. He also directed attention to the fact that the declaration of the complete execution of the deed had been made by two creditors, who had not even inspected the deed. Mr Guinness pointed out that there was no opposition to the application. The Judge thought it would be advisable to adjourn the application. All the signatures should show that they were authorised by the principals. He must be satisfied that the deed waa properly executed, and there ought to accompany it a declaration that it was executed within three months after the filing of of it. After further conversation, the Judge said that under the circumstances stated by the Clerk, he would adjourn the application in order to give the principals an opportunity of signing the deed or assenting to it by making a declaration that the agents were authorised. Mr Guinness asked his Honor to make the i order conditional on the assent of the two creditors who had been mentioned being obtained. The Judge said the application could be renewed in Chambers at any time in Hokitika, Mr Perkins said, in reference to the creditor who had denied his agent's authority to sign the deed, he had instructed him to oppose this application, and he had only been informed that morning to proceed no further in the matter. The Judge : Did he say he would sign the deed ? Mr Perkins : No, your Honor. The Judge said he would adjourn this application. It did not come before him in a form in which he could take any cognisance of it. The Clerk wouid be authorised to act for him in this matter. Jules Guerin. — This was a similar application. No certificate signed by the trustees had been presented. Mr Guinness made the application. There were the same objections to this as to the last application, and an order similar to the last was made. Stephen Egan. — This was an application for adjudication upon a petition. Mr Guinness appeared in support of the application. An order was made for a meeting of creditors on the 16th October, and for the surrender of the petitioner at the next sitting of the Court, on the Ist December. Thomas Brown. — This was a similar application to the last, and an order to the same effect was made. In these two cases authority was given to the Clerk of Court to act in the absence of the Judgfe; and if no opposition was offered at the next hearing, on the Ist December, that application could then be made for final discharge. The Court adjourned sine die.