SUPREME COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume V, Issue 276, 23 November 1870, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTINGS. [Before Bis Honor Mr. Justice Richmond and , a Common Jury.] Bank of New Zealand v. Harley and i others, executors of the late Henry Godfrey. i This was an action, to recover the sum i of £250, the amount of a promissory note 1 signed by H. Godfrey, and endorsed by s James Sinclair. ■ Mr. Conoliy and Mr. Pitt appeared for i the plaintiffs, and Mr. Acton Adams and i Mr. Kingdou for the defendants. i On the bill being produced, Mr. Adams objected to its being received in evidence ou the ground that it was insufficiently : stamped, one of the stamps having been affixed siuce the action commenced. i Mr. Conoliy said that he admitted this, : but was prepared to prove that the proper amount of stamps had originally been i affixed, one of them having since become i detached, as would be seeu by the mark left on the bill. ; Mr. Adams having argued the case atsome length, his Honor said that judging i from the appearance of the document he ■ should admit parallel evidence of its , having been duly stamped. In its present state, it was clear that if it originally bore stamps only to the value of three shillings, the further stamp of two shillings had been fraudently omitted. There was only a partial omission of the duty, and therefore he should admit the evidence. W. Nelson, solicitor, deponed to having seen Godfrey sign the bill at Blenheim. He recollected having referred to the Stamp Act to see what the amount of duty was, and every care was taken to see that the proper number and amount of stamps were affixed. Cross-examined : He could not swear to the number of stamps affixed, at the time, but he could to the amount required by the Act having been attached. John Kissling, manager of the Bank of New Zealand at Blenhiem, recognised the the bill, had seen it signed in Mr. Nelson's office, and l'emembered having purchased the necessary stamps to the value of five shillings, which he saw affixed and cancelled by Mr. Godfrey. The bill was discounted, and the money placed to Sinclair's credit, and had been held by the Bank ever since, now nearly three years. Charles Frederick Eyes, clerk at the Bank, remembered the bill being presented for discount, when he looked at the Stamp Act to see what was the amount of duty, and found that stamps to that value were attached. His Honor having ruled that sufficient evidence of the necessary amouut of stamps having been affixed to the bill had been produced to allow it to go to the jury, Mr. Acton Adams, after putting Messrs H. and A. Pitt into the witness box with a view to eliciting from them when the absence of the stamp in question had been discovered, addressed the jury stating that, owing to the Judge having decided against him on every point, his case had completely broken down, and it only remained for them to state what was the amount to be paid by his clients. His Honor then sent the case to the jury, expressing his regret that .they should have been called upon to sit so long and listen to what was merely a legal discussion. It only remained for them to find a verdict for the plaintiff on all the issues submitted to them. A verdict was returned accordingly for £250 together with interest at the rate of 8 per cent, per annum. CULLEN V. GABY AND OTHEKS. Action to recover possession of certain lands held by plaintiff under mortgage for £5000, granted by Gaby, who is now in England, and has not complied with the terms of the mortgage contract. Mr. Acton Adams and Mr. Kingdon appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Conoliy and Mr. Pitt for the defendants. The case was in progress when we went to press. i