MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 9 December 1927, Page 4

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

THURSDAY, DECEMBER Bth. (Before W. Meldrum, Esq.. S.M.) A ETERNOON. SITTING. DISPUTED DEBT. C. Mulvihill and others (Mr Park) v. A. Morel and others (Mr Hannan), claim for interest due, £52 It's. Mr Hannan asked leave to claim exemption under the Statute of Limitations, as set out in the affidavit of one of defendants, J . D. Lynch. He also asked for an adjournment to enable specific details to he supplied. James A. Murdoch gave evidence thathe was one of the plaintiffs. They were suiit" for interest on £(1U() which had been lent to J. D. Lynch for the purpose of erecting a lime crushing plant. Lynch bad stated that lie had arranged to get tins £OO9 Il'oiu bis hank in 1910. That lie was the owner of a farm at Teretnakau Settlement. Near to tin; farm there was a limestone rock and if they could get it crushed near the farms they would get it cheaper than from Kokatahi. At llie next meeting, Mr Lynch said tie uas unable to get it from the National Bank, but would lie ißde to get it from the Bank of New Zealand. Later he stated he was unable to get it. Then witness and E. Mulvihill provided the money, £3OO each. They obtained a joint and several promissory note from J. D. Lynch, A. E. Morel, J. Corbett and ,1. Martyn, which was later dishonoured. Witness had warned Lynch at the time, but Lynch said lie wanted it put through as he had ordered the lime crusher. Interest was paid regularly for some time. When .Mr Lynch (idled a meeting of creditors, witness refused to take part in a composition. After a considerable time, payment of interest was not made regularly. and he had called at Mr Lynch’s office and obtained two cheques for £2l each, the latter in 1920. There is now 18 mouths’ interest due lo May of this year. The other parties were not objecting to the payment of the interest. £IOO was paid off the principal in May, 1.921, which now stands at £501). There was no request tor payment of the whole amount, as there was no desire to unduly press the farmers and the only desire was that Lynch should not escape payment at the cost of the others. The last payment- of interest was on June loth. 192(4.

To Mr Hannan. —Mr Lynch was present on one occasion when witness received a cheque for £2l. Since December 1920, other parties to the bill bad paid the interest. On May 30th. 1922, £IOO was paid off by Morel and Martyn. None of these amounts had been paid by Lynch. He had had no communication with Lynch since ITI2O as to payment, as interest was being paid. John Corbett gave evidence that ho was one of the party 11110 Tind borrowed £OOO from Murdoch ami Mulvihill. lie handed in a statement' of the payments made. Mr Lynch wax one of the partners. The amount sued for is correct. Witness did not give authority fo defend. He also produced a letter from Morel to the same effect. Lynch was the prime mover in the erection of the lime crusher. Had a conversation with Lynch hist Saturday. Hr said he thought, it was dead, and that he had filed a defence that it was beyond the slalute i f limitations. Witness said that wax not so as interest had been paid to within 18 months ago. Lynch then said he had no share, as he passed the share over to Thomas when he had sold the larm. Witness replied that was not so, as Lynch had stated that he intended to hold them for himself. Lynch sa l that he thought that when Mulvihill died tlie whole thing died with him. Witness knew that Murid and wflnoss had each paid in £79 more than Lynch and £57 more than Martyn. To Mr Hannan~ The- lime crusher cmlv worked for a few days in 1919 Witness found his share of interest \vli<m» siskin! for it by Tkissott who acted as Secretary. He did not know if Lynch had been asked lo pay his share.

To Mr Park The installing of the lime-crushcr had helped Mr Lynch to sell his farm. Mr Hannan asked for judgment for (defendant on the grounds that the action does not lie in that one cannot sue for interest on a promissory note, where the principal is not sued for. After Nil’ Park had replied his "Worship stated he would reserve judgment on that point, and alter hearing further argument reserved judgment until next sitting.