MAGISTERIAL.

Patea Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 1020, 11 April 1883, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

: - PATE A—YESTERDAY. (Before C. A. Wray, Esq., R.M.) CIVIL CASES. Howitx v. Kendall. —Claim, £6 14s 4d, goods supplied. Mr Barton for plaintiff, Mr Hamer ton for defendant, . ■ ■ William Hovvitt, the plaintiff, said ; I know the defendant. That is a copy of the account (produced). The account is for July; and September, 1882. Since the goods were supplied defendant filed a declaration of bankruptcy. I have Had a conversation with the defendant about the debt. I applied to Mr Odgers for the settlement of the account but he refused to pay me. ! Cross-examined : 1 have been supplying the Manutahi contract alternate months before this. Mr Kendall paid me up to the month of June what he owed me. Defendant did not tell me in August that Mr Odgers would pay me. I take the Patea Mail. I saw a gazette notice in that paper that Mr Kendall had filed. I heard that Mr Odgers had taken the contract over from Mr Kendall. I have supplied bread on the contract since September, and Mr Odgers has paid me. I don’t remember Mr Kendall telling me before he filed that Mr Odgers had taken over the contract. I had no conversation with Mr Kendall about money until after Mr Odgers refused to pay me. I can’t say whether I supplied defendant with an account for September. It is not true that defendant told me to go to Mr Odgers for the money. Because I heard that other people were being paid by Mr Odgers I applied to him for payment of my account. W. L. Dean, Clerk of the District Court, produced the papers in the Bankruptcy of William Kendall, and said : Mr Howitt is not down in the statement of assets and liabilities as a creditor. I have got the affidavit as to service of notices (produced). Cross-examined : Mr Kendall got his discharge on the 11th of October, 1882. That is the discharge (produced). ' This was the,case for the plaintiff. William Kendall the ’defendant stated : I am overseer for Wilkie Bros. About a year ago I took a contract on the Foxton-New Plymouth Railway and worked till the 24th. July as contractor, and till the sth of October as overseer. My sureties were Messrs Odgers and Mahony. On the 24th July the contract was made over to Mr Odgers, who was to pay all liabilities and receive all moneys coming to the contract. Mr Howitt’s account was one that was given to Mr Odgers. I had a conversation with

plaintiff before September, when I told him that the Manutahi affair;would not be on my bankruptcy, as Mr Odgers had taken; over the contract, and he f 'said,“ That would be allright.” I did not order" goods from plaintiff after I told him the contract had passed from me. Mr Odgers drew the progress payments for July and September. I remained on the contract from the time of taking over till October 5. Plaintiff has never served me with an account for the month of September, Gross-examined : There was no agreement to my knowledge that Mr Odgers was to pay the plaintiff. William Odgers : lam a licensed victualler residing in Patea. Last year I took over what is known as the Manutahi contract Foxton-New Plymouth Railway. No one drew any money coining to the contract after I took it oyer. I made the first draw in August. When I took the contract over I was to pay all debts incurred after that time. Witness here objected to answering counsel’s questions re paying debts incurred by defendant. After Counsel on both sides addressed the Court at considerable length, His Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for £2 16s Bd, with costs £1 12s. Shelley v. McGrath.—Claim £2, witnesses expenses. When this case was called upon, both parties failed to pot in an appearance, and it was accordingly struck Off.