A PECULIAR CASE.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2949, 7 September 1882, Page 2

A PECULIAR CASE.

A'strange'case, Dunnett V. Lynch, came on in Chambers before Mr Justice Gillies yesterday at Auckland, which has been the subject of some gossip for a week past. ' Mr George appeared for the defendant, and moved ex parte for an order for leave to appeal and defend the action, which is of a peculiar character. It is brought on a promissory note alleged to have been made by defendant for £IOOO and held by plaintiff, but Lynch disavowed all knowledge of the bill, which has already been the subject of a deal of mysterious speculation. It is reported to be made and signed by the defendant in favor of one A. Pierce Crosbie, and came in the hands of the plaintiff, who alleged that he gave for it valuable consideration and, special service. It appeared there were no less than two actions of libel pending in the Supreme Court; the defamatory matter complained of by the plaintiff (Crosbie) in these actions being that Lynch and another person named Patrick Gleeson accused him of forging Lynch’s name to a bill for £IOOO. Pierce Crosbie was a clerk in the service of the Bank of New Zealand, and at the time stated in the bill was manager of the branch of the Bank at Dargaville. He claimed damages for the loss of his situation in the Bank of £SOO. It appeared also that the plaintiff Dunnett, as holder of the bill, presented it to John Abbott for discount, but Abbott declined it three or four times, and returned it to the plaintiff Dunnett, and refused to discount it. The plaintiff claims as holder for a consideration of: £2 advanced to Crosbie, and .further for services as a broker in endeavoring to get the bill discounted. It is in his capacity as bolder of the bill, and the maker being indebted to him for services rendered and valuable consideration' given, that the present action was brought. It was also prayed by the defendant that His Honor wonld direct the bill should be deposited in the custody of the Registrar of the Court. His Honor said this was an action in which it was clear an order should be made in terms of the application. He directed leave to plead should be given, and that the bill should be deposited in the hands of the Registrar of the Court.