MAGISTERIAL.

Patea Mail, 18 October 1882, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

PATEA, TUESDAY, OCT. 17. (Before C. A. Wray, Esq, R.M.) DRUNKENNESS. Two first offenders were fined respectively 10s and 10s and costs 7s. CIVIL CASES. North v. Irwin. —There was no appearance of defendant. Mr North stated that at a meeting Irwin had agreed to give 4s in the £ to Mr Dale for distribution amongst the creditors. He would ask for an adjournment for a month or two to see if he carried out his agreement. Mr Hamerton mentioned that the agreement arrived at was that 2s in the £ should be paid .at once, and the remaining two shillings in three months. Case adjourned for throe months accordingly.Paterson y. Clagde. —Claim, £3B 8s on judgment summons, Mr Barton for plaintiff ; Mr Hamerton for defendant. Mr Barton called

James Clague, who deposed that he had confessed judgment to Mr Paterson’s claim, but had not paid it. Ho made his living by selling milk, of which he disposed of about 40 quarts daily. Sold some at 3d, and the whole amounted to 10s per day-. Kept a hank account at the Bank of New Zealand and the Bank of Australasia. His present credit in both was about 255. Had paid in nothing during the last two months. Had no idea how much money he had collected, nor how much was owing. Did not collect £5 during the first week in the month. His last payment into the bank was about £l4, the proceeds of the sale of a mare belonging to Mrs Clague. The marc was once Ids, but about nine months ago lie settled everything upon his wife except five pigs and 70 or 80 fowls. He remembered having an interview with Paterson about nine nionlhs ago. Paterson said that he would release him from all liability under his lease if he would get Dcßanks out. Witness did not ask JPaterson to accept Dctßanks as his tenant in his place. The reason that Paterson offered to release him was that a party wanted to buy- tho place. He had the pigs and fowls y-et, bnt did not know their value. He never informed Mr Palmer that he would make a settlement ; Palmer advised him to do it. He was nat in debt at the time, and he paid Ids debts as he went along. He had paid perhaps £SO in that way- out of the proceeds of the milk. He made everything over to his wife, and trusted to. her to keep him. He did so in the interests of his family 7. Had no other means of livelihood beyond what he had already stated. He did not authorise Mr Adams to say that ho would pay the rent to Paterson if he would release Idm. By Mr Hamerton : lie had no debts at the time ho made tiie settlement ; he did not owe £l. Paterson had applied to De Banks for the rent. Since the judgment was obtained, on the 14th of last month, he had not been in a position to pay. Alfred Palmer, farmer at Whenuakura, stated that defendant had formerly been his tenant. About 9 months ago he came to witness and said that he was going away to Dunedin, where he iiad some land. He said that Paterson refused to accept De Banks as Ids tenant ; but that if he did not do so he (Clague) would make all he had over to his wife. He led witness to believe that he had 150 acres in Dunedin, and lhat his brother-in-law was going to plough 50 acres ready for cropping. Defendant held his lease from Mr F. R. Jackson, and it would expire in 1888. He had about 28 acres, and paid £2O per year vent. By- Mr Hamerton : Was not on good terms with Clague now. They 7 had been friends when he was on his farm. By Mr Barton : Had not advised Clague to make the settlement on ids wife. Defendant was recalled, and examined by Mr Barton : His wife’s maiden name was Jessie Masher. She had two brothers, Willliam and Anthony, who, when last he heard, were living near Oamavu. Did not know if they had any 7 property 7. Witness had no land in Otago. Ho told Palmer that he had had land there under lease. Ho had 150 acres at Otepopo, and it was leased frem John Mains for two crops. That arrangement, which was only 7 a verbal one, expired about 7 years ago. Mr Barton, in his address to the Court, spoke in strong terms against the practice of making conveyances for the purpose of defeating creditors. He contended that Mr Clague had made a settlement witli such intention, and therefore under a statute of Elizabeth it was void. It was evident that defendant had (he means of paying, and lie asked tho Court for an order of committal unless payment was made. His Worship in giving judgment said that defendant could not be said to be without means, and ho would therefore order him to pay £ioby the end of next week, and £lO per month afterwards, or in default two months’imprisonment. The debt with costs amounted to £3B 8s od. Cowern v. M’Caktiiy. —Mr Hamerton said that lie appeared for both parties, who wore anxious for an adjournment until Friday, to see if they could not arrive at a settlement. Tho case was adjourned, and the Court rose.