R. M. COURT.

Patea Mail, Volume I, Issue 9, 21 November 1887, Page 2

R. M. COURT .

Pa tea Borough Council v. H. I. Jones, Mr Finnerty, Town Clerk, appeared for the Borough Council, and Mr Borlase (of Borlase and Barnicoat, Wanganui), for Mr Jones ; claim, £3lllos for rent due to the Council. Defendant pleaded nil dehet. C. Finnerty. sworn, said; ho was acting Town Clerk, and produced the Borough rent hook. There was one year’s rent duo for sections 1 2 3 of Block XL. Could find no record of its having been jmid. Cross-examined by Mr Borlase : I am acting, by resolution of the Council, as temporary clerk during the absence of Mr Eyton. He has not ceased to be clerk. I know his writing. The receipt produced is in his hand writing. The receipt is for previous rent, not the rent now sued for. This receipt (produced) is also in Eyton’s hand writing, and includes the amounts I now claim. The first two amounts in the receipt are credited, but not the other amounts. I have found one or two discrepancies in the borough books, but, generally, they were in good order. I have demanded the rent previously, 1 demanded a larger amount, Tho reason that the first amounts are deducted is, that they have boon duly credited in the cash book, and the- latter amounts havo not.. H, I. Jones, sworn, said: He was defendant in the case, and knew Mr Bytoib

who was his agent, and collected rents from sub-tenants, and paid Borough, rents and rates out of it; had done so for some years. He (defendant) had had receipts in various forms, some printed and some written. Had no reason to suppose the rent sued for was not paid to the Borough, as he held the receipt for it. A Did not know anything of it until told by Mr Finnorty after Mr Eyton had for England. Presumed Mr Eyton received the rents from the tenants. ■ To the Court; I do not know of moneys collected by Mr Eyton and accounted for. I cannot say hdhad actually collected the amounts mentioned in the receipt. They were duo to me, and have not been paid to me in any other way. . _ Cross-examined by Mr Finnerty; I came up purposely to settle accounts with Mr Eyton, as I was leaving for England. I do not recollect whether he said ho had not the amounts in hand. I expected to receive a more definite statement when, the moneys were actually collected. To the Court: Mr Eyton gave me a receipt for moneys which, at that time, had not come into his possession. Mr Finnerty (re-called), I was here when Mr Eyton left. He left quite openly He had leave of absence from the Borough Council, and several other local bodies.

Mr D. M. Harris, Secretary P. P. L. B. & I. Society, sworn, stated the amounts mentioned in the receipt as coming from the Society, had been paid over. Mr Jacob gave evidence as to rents of subsequent dates, having been paid to the Borough. This being all the evidence, Mr Bfcrlase addressed the Court for a few minutes, when the Court said it was a pity the case had not been allowed to await the return of Mr Eyeton as his leave had so nearly expired, and it would, therefore, adjourn the,case for a month on the understanding that if Mr Eyton had not then returned, and was likely to do so shortly, the case would ho further adWalker v. Williamson.—-This was case brought by the plaintiff to recover damages for the alleged wrongful recovery of goods from a bailiff. It arose out of a hill of sale given by the late Mr Lundhsrg to Mr Williamson. The bailiff being placed in possession by Mr Walker for rent. Evidence of a very contradictory character was given, and the Court was occupied the whole day, and owing to the non arrival of Mr Wanklyn, who had been subpoenaed on the case, it hod to be adjourned to the oth December.