RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume III, Issue 299, 18 August 1875, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT

:Gisbobnb, Tuesday, August 17,1875. '.d (£ S T ,8 Y Z 1 ■: .JBefore W. K. Nesbitt, Esq., R.M. j and Edwabd MeEFiiY, Esq., J.P. Wiixiam Donaldson was charged with. Slialiug a horse the property of one Meri Hope from Wgakn«ra*ikC:T“ ’ jMr. ’Meri Hape, sworn, deposed : On the 2nd of August, the horse jin pn, : Biy possession; I have it how, but it was taken afay from me on that day by I, sawl him riding away on the horse. I did not, give hma.permission to take it away. He did n|t, bring- the ’ horse ’ Badt td “ths i I ‘ towitre ‘ horse on tho following day in Stevenson’s place where it has remained since. I gave information ft Ber|eant Mills about my loss: jCross-exammeri iTy Mr.-Wilson : The horse isi mine. Prisoner has been in tho habit of taking ,khe .fewee: without my consent during tho lasti IpEft yeajs.,, Prisoner rpsidtß-, with his wife in the same house &s I do. His wife is miy mother. The Bench at this stage considered that the evidence was’ insaffieient to substantiate a charge of felony and diacharged the accused from custody. ■ ->; • n.’ • BTBONG -V. BBYANT. Claim £8 18s 3d settlement of partnership account. Mr. Wilson for plaintiff; and Mr. Rogan for defendant. : Counsel for the defence took a preliminary objection to the proceedings chiefly on the gtound that one partner cannot sue tho other in law, and cited. Chitty and other authorities to prove that the Court has no jurisdiction. Mr. Wilson replied, sustaining his opinion by copious argument that the colonial law was sufficient to meet the case in equity, and that the claim was not one of partnership per se. k The Bench, after due consideration, decided to go on with the case. Mr. Wilson, on opening the case for the plaintiff called ’ Howard Strong, whqdsposed to the dissolution of partnerships between himself and defendant, aud verified the items forming tho claim now made. Cross-examined by Mr. Rogan: There was no document of release signed by defendant and myself. On the settlement of account it was arranged that I warto discharge Bryant from liability ip the partnership by my paying him £3B, I taking over all assets and liabilities. I have paid him £3O, holding the £8 “to ooyer discrepancies. I have found several inaccuracies and now sue for their recovery. I have never made any previous claim upon defendant because I held tho £B. For the defence, Mr. Rogan called T. M. , who deposed : In the partnership arrangement rtoth'ihg was said about my paying rent for living in plaintiff’s house, for which- he now subs me, neither, Until after the dissolution, did ho make any claim for it. Mr. Dufour was mutually appointed to draw up a dsed of release, this was signed by Strong and myself, and stipulated that I was to receive from Strong £3B as full settlement of account. I admit some of the items claimed as they are not worth disputing. Frederick Dufour, sworn, deposed to having drawn a release of partnership between the plaintiff and defendant, it was signed by one —it might have been Bryant —and given to Strong. By. Mr. Wilson : J drew other documents as well as the release. I am not a solicitor, and am perfectly aware that I have rendered myself liable to a penalty of £lOO for so doing. Judgment for defendant with costs. [Leet Sitting.]