ORMOND LETTER.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 26, 25 December 1883, Page 3

ORMOND LETTER.

[from an occasional contributor ] an absence of some months from our flourishing township, it is agreeably surprising to see that great strides are beiug taken both for social and local advancement. First —>nf all, touching the much-required and long-looked-for improvement of the roads. \\ e find the Kaiteratahi and Ormond Road has been metalled, and such alterations are being made to the main road that the same, when completed, will render the road through the township the best in the district. Buildings have been going up rapidly in every direction,—two new bakers’ shops and a blacksmith’s shop have been erected ; another butcher’s shop is reported as about to be Shortly built, and several new dwelling■houses have been built ; and notwithstanding ■all this, there is still a demand for more A better evidence of increasing could not be hid than this.

The saw-mills ard fellmongeries are in full swing, affording much dem md for labor, tend had it not been for the unprecedentedly ■et season hitherto experienced, which has Retarded grass-seeding, shearing, etc., there ■an be no doubt but that the present year would have been oue of the most successful we have ever had.

A step in the right direction is that the residents have inaugurated local public amusements, to be held on New Years Day. A good programme, with liberal prizes, has been drawn up, and should induce a large

attendance of competitors. It is also to be noted that the sports committee have, through the kindness of Mr. Bolton, who has generously given them the use of the ground for the day free, been able to select a most desirable paddock, on his beautiful farm, for holding the sports. It is well wooded, and visitors from a distance, whom we hope to see muster in large numbers, will find the shade afforded by the trees most agreeable, should they desire either to witTMs the sports, have a picnic, or oth< r■®enjoy themselves. The balance of the FfuudJi derived from the sports will be handed o ver to the Gisborne Hospital. Iu the eveu-

Jing a concert and dance wild be held, which will doubtless be well attended. The surplus fund# arising therefrom whll be applied for - the purpose of providing prizes for the child rea attending the Ormond School.

SUPREME COURT. > THURSDAY, (Before his Honor Judge Prendergast.) {Continued from our tael ie-Hie.) After a discussion as to the issues his Honor, in summing up, addressed the jury and asked them to keep to the evidence, and not to trouble their minds as to whether the company was funned on a sound basis or not, as they had not to consider whether it had been formed for good or for bad, but simply as it bore on the issues placed before them. Neither had they to consider what effect their decision would have. They had nothing whatever to do with the result of the action, as, if anything arose out of their decision, the law would amply provide for all that. A good deal had been justly said about the wrong and danger of persons dealing with Native lauds not having independent legal advice, and other independant assistance. The Natives ought to have legal advice—some one to look after their interests. The jury would have to decile whether the Natives had been deceived in this case. Hi* Honor then explained the operations of the detbd of covenant, which, he said, Was to give power to deal with legal estate. The only way of interfering with its operations wa« by caveat, and then persons would deal with the land at their peril. The object of Land Transfer Act was to simplify the title. He had no doubt the jury would have some knowledge of these matters, but he thought it better to explain these things to them. The scrip certificates were simply evidence as to holding shares in the company, and were simply vouchers as to the fact. If the scrip was destroyed, still the parties would be shareholders, and the destruction would not i .feet their right. His Honor then went trough the different issues, pointing out th ’ questions the jury would have to decide ‘and upon what grounds the decision should fe given, together with the evidence bearing on the several points. He did not think he word “ fraudeptly ” need trouble them, s it was the same as “falsely.” The issue < i that point to be considered was “ Was the said order of the Court obtained from the Court by causing the Natives to swear falsely before the Court.” It was said the Natives had been induced to swear falsely, but he did not see that any evidence had been adduced that anyone had done so. He saw no evidence to show that a iyone had said to the Court that there was no other arrangements outside those before the Court. His Honor then read extracts from the Court books where Te Huke hail staled

“ We have received the whole of the pur-chase-money, £9,000, and we understand thut the whole land has passed to the com* puny.” He did not see that there was any evidence to show that these were the only terms agreed upon, aud it was for the jury to say whether there were other terms agreed upon. The plaintiff sod the cheques were merely a pretence, and the defendants said it was a bona fide payment. Thut would be a matter for the jury, who would have to decide whether it really was a bona fide payment or not. His Honor then reverted co the evidence relating to the deed ?f covenant, and said the Natives were no doubt speaking the truth when they said they expected the land to come back to them. No doubt they thought so in a certain sense, but not in the sense put before the jury. Mr. Keen had said the Natives had asked him to keep the deed of covenant for Safety from fire. The jury would say whether the deed hud been kept from the Natives or not. Mr. Berry hud stated that the cheques were made out on the Ist of April for £8,809, and that £2OO hud been paid previously. There could be no doubt that the remaining £4OO had not b**en paid until the month ot May, when it was taken up to Lologs Bay by Mr. DeLautour. It did not appear eleariy, and no evidence had shown whether Puki had been shown a slip or deque when he had been taken to the Bunk after n fusing to swear that he had received the money. Captain Porter had mid ho thought, the d<*ed entirely unintelligible to the Natives, and the Court thought so to. It would require even a skilled lawyer to mark the deed with pencil at certain parts before he could understand it cleirly. It. was highly i nprobable and quite unnecessary that the

Muories should understand the working* of a j >int stuck company, but slid enough had, he thought, been explained to them to enable them to understand tnat their lands were being conveyed absolutely to the company, ’’’he jury could now retire, and should they require any assistance they could ask for it and it would be given. The jury then retired at about half-past twelve, and returned into Uouit a*. 2. 5 p m., with the following answers io the issues.— 1. —Admit;® I. 2. —Admitted. 3.—Plain tiflk understood when signing the transfer that they were absolutely purling with their land—also that no false or fradulent representations wore tu.ide to induce them to sign. 4—No; but the paimiff* were induced to sign the memorandum of transfer by the promise that a deed of Covenant should be executed, which deed of covenant was duly executed and ac-epted by the plaintiffs as the dec; promised. s.—admitted. 6.No ; the mcni 'randum of transfer. 7.—No ; but the promises made by the defendants were fulfilled by the execution of the deed of covenant. B—Abandoned.8 —Abandoned. 9. —Ye* ; agreed to. 10.—Ye«. 11.— I’he whole <>f the consideration money <.f £9,000 whs paid. After the juiy’s verdict had been read Mr McLean asked to submit further issues, which were allow d and answered as follows:—l.—Was £8,250 of ihe £9,000 con-

sideration money pud to the plaiut-ff* by the d>fondants by a cheque of the defendants nut marked by the B*nk, and was the said cheque placed to the credit o the plaintiffs on the 6th April. Admitted. 2.— When was the said cheque paid by the defendants io the plaintiffs. A 'lnuted on the 3>d <>f April 1882. 3. —Did the plaintiffs by the r cheque of £«,100 pay the defendants for £B,lOO worth of shares, and was such pur chase in pursuance of the agreement conlai ed in tie covenant—Admitted. 4 Was such payment by the plaint ffs made before the £8,250 wa* placed to the phntiffs’ credit at the Bank —Admitted. On Friday morning his Honor said the case had n<»t been disposed of. Mr Hd wards (for Mr Brassey) said the conrse the plain)iffs desi eto pur.-ue was to let the case come before the Court, in Banco. There were cenaiu q «esti ms arising l under the Native Lands Act which might entitle the plaintiffs to a judgment, not wii ii.-tandi- g the finding of the jury on t e facts. Uu ler these cir umstances he wis >ed the case adjourned to vVeliington. It was not desirable to discuss complicated questions under the Native Lands 'ct upon circuit. It was a pure question of law. His Honor said at present the matter hail n t been tried. The jury had answered certain issues. He wou'd reserve the plaintiffs leave to move u on am thing in the Judge’s notes. He was willing !o adjourn the case to Wellington providing both parties agreed to that course, otherwise he would give judgment fur the defendants, reserving leave uiuve.

Mr Rees said adjourning the case to Wellington meant more trouble and expense to the defendants without any prospect of getting their costs, the plaintiffs being merely nominal plaintiffs Mr Edwards remarked that the company ouuld take it out of the land as they had possession of it. As something would be doue iu auy case the defendants cuuld not he damnified by the removal of the trial to Wellington. That such would be done was ceitaiuly understood by all parties yesterday, It was because of that understanding Mr McLean had returned to Napier. Mt Rees denied this, and his Honor post poned his decision until the next day.

On his Honor preparing to give judgment, on Saturday, Mr. Rrasaey said that, from a telegram he had received from Mr, McLean, he found that his learned friend had thought with himself thut the case would be adjourned to Wellington to be disposed of in Banco. He hud quite understood that Mr, Rees bad agreed to that course. Mr. Rees said he had not done so. He hud understood that leave would be given to move.

His Honor said he would give judgment for defendants, with £175 coals, and would reserve leave to plain Litt’s to move to set aside the judgment and enter & verdict for plaintiffs un the findings of the jury, the admissions, or the Judge’s notes, Execution stayed for fourteen days after the Billing in Marcli next.

At the request of Mr. Brassey, the judgment was interpreted to the Datives thruugn Mr. Gannon. They were informed by ids Honor that judgment had been given against them, aud that the costs of the action were £175 ; but tiiat leave had been given them until next March tu ask the Court to sec aside the present verdict aud to enter up the same lor the plaintiffs ; and that the costs Would not have tu be paid um.il next iMardi.

Wi Te Ruki wished to know whut was the meaning of the deed of covenant. Une side said it meant oue thing, and the other side another.

His Honor declined to say anything further on the subject.

COOPER AND STUBBS V. MRS. CLARKE. Claim for possession of land and decrees for accounts and injunctions, Messrs Kenny ami Nolan for the plaintiffs, and Messrs filevewiight and DeLautuur for the defendant. Mr DeLautour stated that the accounts and papers would not arrive until Monday next. Aluch discussion took place, and it was agreed that there should be a decree fur accounts, and that the defendant sliuuld enter into a bond fur £lOOO, to meet whatever might be found to be due from her estate. PONSFORD V, BISHOP, Claim £162 12s for work doue. Mr Rees appeared fur the plaintiff, and i\lr Edwards, with Mr Finn, fur the defendant.

The plaintiff deposed as to entering into the coutract with the defendant through Air Quigley, as architect. The contract hud been completed, and he claimed the balance of £165 now due and owing to him. in the course of a lengthened cross-exami-nation by Mr Edwards the plaintiff acknowledged that some places were nut rilled iu with sawdust according to specifications. Did not consider himself a first-rate practical builder. It was very common for builders nut io adhere to the sp-'cilicalious. VX iliiuni Madder, bricklayer, built the chimney according to cuntruct. John W. Wade deposed us to the iron used in the construction being as good as that specified. G. H. Hull, painter and glazier, said that some of the glass used tor the windows was lather small, a defect which could be easily remedied.

Juu.es Harris, carpenter, deposed that the contract hud been carried out in a proper manner.

Messrs Mackrill, A. Y. Ross, and Sigley were examined.

Air Edwards said it was plain the building hud not been c onstructed according to specification, and it was also plain that the architect had failed in his duty. ii is Honor remarked that the case would not take more than a quarter-of-an-hour in the R.AI. Court,

Mr Bishop, the defendant, gave evidence as to Mr Quigley calling for and accepting tenders, and as to his calling Mr Ponsi'ord's attenticnto the faulty work and inferior material.

Air G. Foster, chemist and assistant to Mr Bishop, gave evidence of hearing the complaints made by Air Bishop to the plaintifi. The rats were very troublesome and had swept the medicine bottles off the f helves.

Mr 8. Clayton, contractor, gave evidence ns to the interior quality of material and work. Tne iron was of mixed brands and the chimney had been filled in with sand instead of bricks.

Air O. B. Hubble, bricklayer, who appeared in the witness-box in his shirt sleeves, gave evidence that the lime used in constructing the chimney was of inferior quality, no Cement had been used, and in addition to the work being badly finished, the chimney was buddy sinking aud coming away from the building. It wuuld cost LlO or Ll2 to reconstruct.

Air W. O. Skeet, builder and contractor, had inspected the building and found various parts not constructed according to the specifications. Mr Quigley also gave evidence as to various deficiencies.

His donor remarked that it was only a paltry case. Mr Edwards and Mr Rees then addressed the Court. Judgment was given for the amount paid into Court, with a verdict for defendant, without costs. REES AND W1 FERE V. J. W. JOHNSON. Mr. DrLautour fur plaintiff; Mr. Edwards, instructed by Mr. Nulau, tor defendant C aims, Hpeeilic performance of agreement. It was alleged that defendant had agreed by deed, after due nutice uithm a certain t-peedied time, tu sell a certain property, which agreement he (defendant) refused to ratify, although all the conditions ou the part of the plaintiffs had been fulfilled. The defendant denied thut the proper conditions of the agreement hud been fulfilled on the part of the plaintiffs. After considerable argument, and Messrs. Rees, Nulan, ami Tucker hud given evidence* it was agreed tu refer the case to Wellingt on to be disposed of iu Banco at the first sittings after the long vacation.