SUPREME COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XI, Issue 266, 7 December 1876, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTINGS. .

[Before his Honor Mr Justicb Gillms.] THIS DAY. Gill and wife v. Joseph Autt Harlbt. Thi3 was an action for damages for malicious prosecution in consequence of defendant having laid an information against plaintiffs for having obtained money under false pretences, and caused them to be arrested and. imprisoned, after which they were brought before two Justices of the Peace, aud the charge was dismissed. The arrest and imprisonment were admitted, the question at issue being whether the proceedings weie malicious and without proper cause. Mr Pitt appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr Acton Adams for the defendant. The followiug jury was sworn:— Messrs J. Bolton (foreman), C. Smith, Thomas bnowdon, R. Boddington, D. Whiting, J. Schwass, J. Robb, P. Leahy, W. Lines, J. Glover, T. Brooks, and J. Braddock. Having opened the case for the plaintiff at some length, Mr Pitt called Carlin Gill, who said: My wife and I are the plaintiffs. We were marred in 1867. We came to Nelson from New Plymouth in 1865. I executed a deed of settlement in December of certain property coming to me under my mother's will, making my wife aud Mr Hughes of New Plymouth the trustees. Under that will certain property was to be mine on attaining the age of 30 years, which was in June, 1874. My mother died before I married Before making the settlement I had been receiving money from home for some years. . In 18.74 Messrs Adams and Kingdon prepared a power of attorney to iorward to England, authorising an agent to receive money for me. In 1875 I used to frequent the Ship Hotel, of which defendant was landlord. In July I owed him about All. He proposed to ma that instead of scoring up the items against me I should give .11:11 an order on Messrs Adams and Kingdon, whioh he could cash, and I could then pay as I went. I gave him au order for £30, signed at his request by myself and wife. He gave me a cheque for £19, and kept the balance in payment of my account. He and I had had several conversations about my morev affairs, with which he was perfectly acquainted. I was expecting £2,000. I had had advances from Adams and Kingdon, and owed them money. I was surprised to find it amounted to between £800 and £900. In December, 1875, a draft for over £1,000 came out. In that month I was arrested by Sergt. Nash on my returning from town to Nelson. I was taken to the lock-up, where I was detained 24 hours. It had been raining, and I was wet through. I had been an invalid for over two years, and caught cold and was very ill in consequence. My solicitor's bill for defending me was £4 16s lOd. My credit was seriously affected by the proceedings taken by Harley. (Letter put in from Mr Pitt to defendant, claiming apology and reparation for arrest.) Cross-examined: When I was frequency at the Ship Hotel I wa3 on very good terms with Harley, and remained so until he took the proceedings. I was not in very distressed circumstances about that time. I did not tell Harley that my landlady had threatened to turn me out on account of my owing her money. I used to borrow small sums from Harley. I told him there was a considerable sum coming out to Adams |and Kingdon for myself and Mrs Gill, and out of that the order I gave him for £30 would be paid. It was on the strength of this that he gave me the cheque for £19. I had signed an account showing the amount I owed Adams "and Kingdon, but am no t able to aay whether it was before or after giving the order to Harley I made no effort to obtain bail at the time of my arrest and imprisonment. Re-examined: It was Harley 's proposition that Mrs Gill should sign the order for £30. Sergeant Nash proved the arrest, aud on cross-examination stated that on Gill being brought before the Justices ha was remanded because it appeared that he had been drinking and was not in a fit state for the case being proceeded with. H. C. Baddeley, clerk of the Resident Magistrate's Court, produced the depositions in the case in that Court. Julia Gill: lam wife of Carlin Gill. In July, 1875, I signed an order for £30 in favor of J. A. Harley. I had never spoken to him before the day on which I signed the order, which was lying on the table all ready for signature when I got there. I had no conversation at all with him about any money coming from England or the deed of settlement. I, made no representations of any kind whatever to him. I saw Mr Harley after the money had arrived, and told him o*f it. I never gave any instructions to Adams and Kingdon not to cash the order. I went to New Plymouth, in November, 1875, and returned in December,, and two days after I was arrested and taken to the Police Court, brought before the Magistrates, and remanded. On the case being heard the charge was dismissed. In the Court, Harley said he had seen Mr Adams before I signed the order, aud that it was owing to information received from him that he lent us the money. He also said that Mr Gill told him he was going to get the settlement upset. I saw Harley some time after the charge was dismissed, and asked him if he would make a public apology, as, if so, I would be satisfied. He replied that I was a dishonest woman, and he would have nothing to say to me. Tha sum that came out was £1029, which came to Mr Hughes as co-trustee with myself. Tha money has been devoted to paying Mr Gill's debts. I authorised Mr Akersten at one time to offer Harley £20 towardt the debt. Cross-examined: I knew that Mr Gill was on good terms with the defendant. I did not know Harley had lent him small sums at various times. Previous to the Bth July we were boarding at Mrs Hamilton's. She was not pressing us for payment. Ido not remember Harley asking about the money coming from England before I signed the order. The reason of my signing the order was to enable Mr Gill to get the cheque for £19. The cheque was given to me, and I handed it to Mr Gill, for which Mr Harley blamed me. I did not tell Mr Harley how the money was tied up by the deed of settlement. The £30 is still owing to Harley. I believe Mr Gill incurred a further debt of £8 to Harley between the date of our signing the order and that of our arrest. Re-examined I was quite willing that the money should be paid to Mr Harley if I could have had my way. William Akersten: I know the plaintiffs. In July, 1875, defendant was keeping the Ship Hotel. About September I had some conversation with him about the Giils. They owed both of us money, and he told me that he had made his right, as they had money coming out, and he had an order signed by Mrs Gill. He said he was sure of getting his money, as he had seen Adams and Kingdon about it. In the last conversation I had with him about it he did not seem so hopeful, and said he should tafce proceedings to empower payment. Shortly after the proceedings against the Gills, I offered at Mrs Gill's request to pay him £20, as £19 was owing bim for money advanced, and the balance of £10 to stand over at interest. He refused to take it, as he said he would get the whole amount. Cross-examined : I don't think the money was offered in settlement of the whole claim. This closed the case for the plaintiff. Mr Acton Adams then opened his case, the gist of which was that at the time plaintiff gave the order he was well aware that he had already settled away the money that was j coming to him towards the payment of his I

debts, and that even up to the present time no money had ever come to Adams ahd Kingdon out of which the order could be paid. Joseph Auty Harley was then called, who said: In July, 1875, I was landlord of the Ship Hotel. I had then known Gill for a few months, and was on intimate terms with him. Gill frequently stated that he had money coming out to him. I used to lend him small amounts from time to time. In July he told me that he was in very bad circumstances, that his landlady was pressing him for money, and that he was very hard pressed, although he was expecting money very shortly. On the 7th July he bothered me a good deal about money, and asked me for £30, for which he and his wife 'would give an order on Adams and Kingdon, through whom money was coming out to her. Next morning he came and said if I would go to his lodgings Mrs Gill would sign the order. I said, No, if it was worth having she must come to me. He brought her, and I told har all that had been said, and she said it was true, and signed the order, when I gave her a cheque for £19. I gave the cheque on the strength of Gill's representations, and for the purpose of assisting him. Previous to that I had never gone to Adams and Kingdon's for the purpose of making enquiries about Gill's affairs. I knew, nothing of the settlement or its provisions. A day or two before laying the information I went to Adams and Kingdon's, and found out from them that the order would not be honored. I heard that the money had come out, and Gill told me that his wife had gone to New Plymouth to arrange with her cotrustee about the payment of the money. On enquiring at Adams and Kingdon's I learnt that there was no chance of the money being paid. I had no ill-will whatever against Gill until I found that he had swindled me. Cross-examined: I did not speak to Gill about the affair between us, hearing from Mr Hughes that I should not get the money at the time of taking proceedings. Before signing the cheque I had asked Mrs Gill whether her husbands yarn about getting money was true. She said yes. I did not order the warrant for his arrest to be issued. This concluded the evidence, and, counsel on both sides having addressed the jury, His Honor commenced to sum up, and had not finished when we went to press.