DOREEN v. DIVE AND OTHERS.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XI, Issue 10, 12 January 1876, Page 2

DOREEN v. DIVE AND OTHERS.

A few months ago there appeared in our columns a paragraph stating that William Doreen of Havelock bad been arrested at Westport on a charge of obtaining money under false pretences. At the last sittings of the Supreme Court at Bleohem, Doreen sued Dive and Company of Havelock for damages in reßpect of this arrest. Mr Pitt appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Conolly and Mr Rogers for the defendants. After the evidence had been heard, his Honor the Chief Juatioe, before whom the case was heard, suggested tbe desirability of arranging the matter without proceeding further with the trial. He thought it was only proper that a man should endeavor to bring himself to a right frame of tnin d and apologise when he had done' wrong; in fact he had no sympathy with that pride which prevented a man from apologising when he was in error. His Honor said if be could be of any assistance to his learned friends he would be happy to do so. The Counsel on both sides then retired with his Honor to his private room. When the Court resumed, Mr Conolly addressed the jury, and said he was happy to state that be and tiis friend Mr Pitt had agreed to a settlement of the case, with the consent of their clients :— " That a verdict shall be taken for £75, carrying costs, and that I, on tbe part of my clients, the defendants in this case, shall publicly in this Court express their regret for having preferred the charge against the plaintiff of having obtained goods on false pretences from the defendants, which charge was not only not sustainable in law, but ouriously enough the plaintiff did not obtain any goods from the defendants oh those days. The false pretence was the promise made by plaintiff that he woulJ pay money, and the defendants were in error in thinking that that would constitute a false pretence. Unfortunately tbe information was loosely worded, and a warrant to arrest the plaintiff was granted. With regard to the second ground of the claim made by the plaintiff, which my olients also regret, of course it is no excuse to say the defendants did not know tbe law, but if any error was committed in ißauing the warrant, that! error was shared by persons high in authority who might be supposed to know the law better than my clients. However, I have now to express the regret of the defendants for both matters." Mr Pitt expressed his concurrence in the terms of settlement, and His Honor said it was far better in oases of the kind, where parties had made a mistake tbat they should apologise, instead of fighting it out to the bitter Old. The jury under his Honors direction then returned a verdict for the plaintiff, damages £75.

The Daily Telegraph of tbe 18th November, says that tbe abundance and even glut of poultry, game, and small wild fowl in the London market at the present moment is remarkable. Pheasants may now be bought for 3s, 28 6J, and even 2s a-piece; and poultry has been sold at 6J a pound. The largest supply of field-fares, redwings, and blackbirds ever known, oame yesterday from Holland and Germany} and this indicates, as some curious observers of the facts of natural history deolare, an approach of very severe weather,