Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MAGISTERIAL.

TIMAUU THIS DAY,

[Before 11. Boetham, Esq., 11.M.] imUXKEXXKSS.

James Nankcrvis was lined 20s, or 48 hours’ imprisonment, for this offence. CIVIL CASES. Judgment by default was given in the following cases ; —Spence v. Mann, T2 3s Gd ; same v. Kingott, £S 17s; same v. Clarkson, £ij lbs ; Allan ami Bray, U2 Is 2d ; Mason and another ax Kennedy, £IOO ; Nicholson ax Kilgrcn, i£4s ; Hope ax Warning, £l2 Gs 7d ; Jackson ax Waring. Tib 4s lid ; Ikwies and another ax Gilbert, 12s Id ; CVnvan and another ax Shields, £7 17s 3d ; Spence ax Albnry, £1 11s Gd, judgment for 10s Avithont costs; Spence ax Burns, £4 10s, adjourned ; Thompson ax Murchison, £BO Is, adjourned to Jan. 20 ; Dollop ax Fulford, £3 Gs Bd, adjourned to Feb. 24 ; Wcrgcs and Manchester ax Green, U2b lbs Id, adjourned to Fob. 20;

Tlie cases of Liston v. Hobbs, and Gray v. Lane were ordered to be struck out, there being no appearance of either party. Crawford v. Millar, claim, £2O. Mr Ecid for plaintiff, Mr White for defendant. This was a claim for money alleged to have been had and received. John Crawford, formerly a saddler, recollected seeing defendant about June 2. About the end of May the defendant called on witness and told him of the failure of J. Milne. He said it was a very unfortunate job for him as ho was a creditor of Milne’s to the extent of more than £IOO. On June 2, defendant called again, and told witness that there had been a meeting of Milne’s creditors, and that he (the defendant) would like to dispose of his interest in the estate. Witness asked what was the good of it, and defendant replied that he had seen the estate, and that the wheat and other crops on it were looking well, mentioning at the same time the drays and other agricultural implements out it, and stating that it would realise 20s in the £ and leave a good surplus for the creditors afterwards. Witness asked defendant what he would take for his interest in the estate, the interest was worth £127 10 Bd. Defendant said he would take £2O for the debt, as he could not afford the time to he running about after it. Had never drawn a penny from the estate as the debt was worthless,. Saw defendant sometime afterwards and told him that the sale of the debt to him was a clear swindle and threatened to put the matter in the hands of his solicitor. Defendant said he didn’t care. Defendant had never offered to assign his estate.

Mr White then, proceeded to crossexamine the witness as to the transaction inquestion. John Miller, farmer, Hook creek, knew Mr Crawford, and saw him on June 2 after the meeting of Milne’s creditors. Mr Crawford knew there was a meeting of creditors and asked witness if he was a heavy loser. Witness said they would carry on the farm with the view of satisfying claims on the estate, Crawfoi’d then asked witness what he would take for his share in the estate. He said £SO, but afterwards agreed to take £2O. Plaintiff agreed to take the bargain at that price, and said he was very glad to buy into that estate, as there were things in it that wanted looking up. By Mr Reid: Never expected to get £SO for his interest in the estate. Never stated that the estate would pay 20s in the £. Mr White then addressed the Bench on behalf of his client, and contended that the case turned upon the question as to whether Mr Crawford was or was not prepared at the time of buying the interest in Milne’s estate —£20 for £127 —to take the accompanying risk._ The plaintiff had had every opportunity of estimating that risk, and if he had not done so it was his own fault. The learned counsel quoted in support of his assertions several extracts from “ Roscoe on Evidence.” Mr Reid, on behalf of the plaintiff, submitted that there had been a misreprescutation on the part of the defendant in the negotiation of the transaction.

His Worship briefly summed up the ease. Mr Crawford had, he said, looked for a great profit, and should have been prepared to take a great risk. -Judgment would be for defendant, with costs.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/SCANT18800106.2.11

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2118, 6 January 1880, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
725

MAGISTERIAL. South Canterbury Times, Issue 2118, 6 January 1880, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL. South Canterbury Times, Issue 2118, 6 January 1880, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert