SUPREME COURT OF N.Z.

Hokitika Guardian, 21 March 1922, Page 3

SUPREME COURT OF N.Z.

WESTLAND DISTRICT,

SITTINGS AT HOKITIKA

MONDAY, MARCH 20th

(Before His Honour Mr Justice Adams) ANOTHER P.N. CASE. Martha Allison v. Diggers Sawmill Company, n. claim for £4OB, for n dishonoured promissory note, Air Joyce, for plaintiff; Mr Park, wi li him Air .Murdoch for the defendants. The following jury of lour were selected:—William E. Shannon, G. E. Raine, John Knowles and James Alex. King (foreman). AFTERNOON SITTING. (Continued.) E. J. Stoop’s examination continued. To Air Joyce—Asked Lynch when the timber was shipped for the p.n., and Insaid that it would he entered back to them. When lie told his directors about the p.n. they said: “ Aon tell in, you trusted Air Lynch add How had to get out of it the best wav lie could.”

Charles Henry Rose deposed he was a commission agent at Greymoutli. In August, 1021, lie was accountant for Alark Sprot and Co.. Knew Mr Stoop and Air Alison.

111 reply to his Honour, Mr Joyce stated that this witness was only to prove that Alison and Stoop had met, his Honour ruling this was not necessary. Robert Alison deposed lie was a mine manager at Greymoutli. The plaintiff was his wife. He did business mailers for her. In consequence of an interview with Ah- Lynch he had a conversation with Mrs Alison. As a result she gave witness written authority to withdraw 6500 from the Post. Office. He withdrew the £SOO and handed it to Mr Pender, of Mark Sprot and Go. It was tn he repaid at the end of the month. At the end of the month asked loi iepa.vment, and was told it was not convenient to repay. The same thing happened in May and Julie, hi July, ,h w'as handed a letter addressed to Mis Alison. He gave it to Mrs Alison and found it contained a clmque (or 15s. being three months’ interest on the £609 advanced. Demands were made from time to time up to 27th August, when Mr Lynch handed witness an envelope to take homo and put in the sale, they being security for -Mrs Alison’s advance of 6500. They consisted cf one p.m for 6400 and 5 p.n’s. for 620 each. The 6400 p.m was due on Ist Oct. Near its due date mentioned lho matter to Mr Rose (Mark Sprots accountant). He said there was no money to nay it. On 11th October, due date, entered Mark Snrot’s office about 2 p.m. Found Mr Lynch bad gone to Wellington that day. In the shipping office found Mr Rose and Mr Stoop. Told them he was going to present the p.n. at the Union Bank. Mr Stoop said: Have you got the bill. Witness said yes, be bad had it for some time. Mr Rose said there was no money at the hank to meet it,and Air Stoop said the Diggers were not going to payOne of them said it was no good presenting it at the bank. Did not see Mr Lynch till about 23rd October an 1 told- ! ’im the Diggers would not pay if," and Mr Lynch said they would have to pay" il. Ah’ Stoop said when he saw him that the Diggers would not pay it. In December told Air Lynch he was going to present the hill, and Mr Lynch said to go on and present it. • Told Mr Stoop of bis intention and handed it to Air Hannan to present. It was duly presented and dishonoured. 3 lie mono.' belonged to Mrs Alison. Witness bad no interest in it.

To Mr A!urdoeli —Did not think it relnarkahle that. .Mr Lynch should want to borrow money from him. He owed Mr Lynch £3OO when he came to him and asked for a loan of C->0!). Millions did not give the loan. Airs Alison did. Found the GSOO the next morning after he was asked for it. When asked for pavment of the loan Mr Lynch said L was not convenient for him. Have had many financial transactions with Air Lynch in the past 20 years. Remember Stoop coming to witness and telling him the history of the pm. Did not get confirmation from AIY Lynch, who said the Diggc v s were owing him the money. Knew that the pm. had hben lodged as security before the hill was presented for payment. Told Airs AILon this on the 11 tli October. He did not see Mr Lvneh till he returned on the 2rtli. He did not telegra|)h to him. He was like Air Stoop, ho trusted Air Lynch. Theodore Richard Hickson deposed he was manager of the Rank of New South Wales at. Hokitika. Tim Riggers Sawmill Company. Ltd., have an account v.uth the bank. Tbe pm. produced was presented by the Rank of N.Z. and "as dishonoured.

This was the ease for the plaintiff. Mr .Murdoch moved for a non-suit on three grounds:—-The lirsf that Airs Alison is not the holder of the lull within the meaning of the Mill of Kx-. change Act, 1 DOS ; secondly, on the face of the hill itself there is an irregularity of stamping, and he objected lo the Court looking at the bill, or only as fains the stamping. He asked the Conn, to rule that the p.n was not, and never was. the p.n. of the incorporated com-

pany. At this stage his Honour, considering the law points raised would last a considerable time, allowed the jury to leave the lmx for half an hour’s recreation, while the legal argument proceeded. Argument followed oil the question ol the stamping of the document, and the time when Mrs Alison became the holder There was a discrepancy here, Ins Honour held, as the p.n. was stamped on 10/12/21, whereas Airs Alison came into possession in August, and thoreiore at that time the bill not being properly stamped she could not be tlm bolder.

His Honour, in the course ol replies to counsel, said there could not. he any doubt that Lynch when lie got the hill knew that it was only a eovenng ooculiient. It was really a most extraordinary transaction. His Honour said he thought on the evidence as it stands, that he would be entitled to instruct the jury that there was no case for them to consider. He did not thinx there was a ease to go to the jury, rh.e transaction was an unusual one, quite out of tbe course of the usual business of the party, and taking tbe legal position of the parties and the position () f M r Stoop he did not think there was •mv evidence to f?o to the jury on U,e question of the power of the signato.ys to make the hill. On the fare of >1 A foil itself shows that iU- time the

bill was duo if was iff the custody of /Mi-“ Alison, and if it was then endorsed it was quite plain the "stamping would be quite incorrect and would place them out of of Court.

Addressing the jury, his Honour said there were certain questions of law that lie had to decide, and as lie had done so it relieved the jury from the trouble of following his direction. Judgment would he given for the defendant company with costs according to scale, an application for second counsel’s fee (for Air Park) being objected to, and refused. TN RE J. ff. WILSON CASE.

,J. H. Wilson v. • Diggets Sawmill Company and James D. Lynch, t-itiiiu for 6403 for a dishonoured promissory note.

Mr "Park for the respondent, said that the Diggers Sawmill Company had made a settlement, satisfactory to the olaintiff.

In this case costs were allowed to the defendant Lynch (Mr Hannan) £5 ss, one half scale costs and one half disbursements. IN DIVORCE.

Petition by Ruleie Muriel Bannister for dissolution of marriage with James Bannister. Mr Murdoch for petitioner. The respondent did not appear. Petitioner gave evidence that she was married on fitli May, 1919. There was one girl issue. , Her husband was guilty of misconduct and had acknowledged. Scrgt. King hurl the Registrar (R. MWill) also gave evidence. A-decree nisi was granted to. he made absolute in three calendar months, with costs on l he lowest scale. IN BANKRUPTCY.

In re -8 mi lie Lucy J. Batson, an application for discharge. -Mr Murdoch appeared for petitioner (instructed by .Messrs Lewis and W'ells). Order made.

IN CHAMBERS. In the estate of: AValtefr William Glass formerly of Otira hut late of Hokitika, laborer dec-eased (Mr S» ! ]ers) motion for probate. Order made. In the estate of George Gillingham deceased. Motion for order to administer estate. Order made. In the estate of Thomas Shaffroy late of Hokitika, miner, deceased ;motion for grant of letters of administration (All- Sellers). Order made. The Court adjourned at 5 p.m. till 11 a.in. next day.

TUESDAY. MARCH 21. His Honor took his seat at 11 a.m. AN APPEAL WITHDRAWN. J. L. Fowler (appellant) v. A. W. Dowell (respondent) appeal from the decision of Air W. Afeldrnm, SAL, at Hokitika. Air Murdoch appeared for appellant and Air Wells for the respondent. Afr Alurdocli announced that the parties had arranged an amicable settlement, and the appeal would not he proceeded with, costs being arranged. Appeal withdrawn accordingly. This concluded the business and the session ended.