Rees v. Barker.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume IX, Issue 957, 2 July 1881, Page 3

Rees v. Barker.

Through an inadvertence the issues found by the Jury in the above trial, which appear in part in the supplement in to-day’s issue, were printed off before final correction. We now amend them, as wired to us late last evening. The issues were originally 34 in number ; I but were cut up during the trial ; the absent numbers are those which were admitted by I the defendant, and, consequently, it is not necessary to reproduce them here. wThe following will be read as part of the issues alluded to 9. Did the Bank of New South Wales in Napier subsequently refuse to allow the defendant to carry out such |agreement ? And did the plaintiff, William Lee Rees, acting for the Native owners, at the request of the defendant, modify such agreement and allow the defendant to purchase 2,500 acres or thereabouts, of the said land for the sum of £20,000 ? And did the defendant, Percival ! Barker, agree to pay off the said Bank provided that the plaintiff, William Lee Rees, would obtain for the defend mt a good and perfect title for the said 2,500 acres in fee simple ?t—No agreement; consequently no refusal, and no modifications ; but Mr. Rees personally entered into the agreement of the sth June, 1878, which fell through. 10. Was the Deed of Trust in the declaration mentioned executed upon certain conditions therein expressed in order to facilitate these arrangements, and was the defendant a party to this Trust Deed, and was this Deed also a Deed of Sale by him of his interests in Whataupoko to the plaintiffs for £47,500, and were powers given in the Trust Deed to the plaintiffs to sell, mortgage, lease, make partition of, or otherwise dispose of the said Block of land so granted and conveyed ?— The Deed of Trust was executed by the defendant on the 25th February, 1879. It speaks for itself. 14. Has the defendant always expressed to the plaintiffs at all times during the mortgage term his willing consent that the sales should be made at such time as might be most favorable, and that any reasonable extension of time would be granted for the completion of the title under the Land Transfer Act, and that he would not exercise the power of sale contained in the said mortgage deed, if all efforts were made by the plaintiffs to complete the title ?—No evidence. 28. Were the plaintiffs, after the 10th day of June, 1878, unable to perform the agreement of that date, mentioned in the 4th paragraph of the defendant’s plea ? —Yes.