A LEGAL. LOTTERY.

Te Aroha News, Volume I, Issue 51, 24 May 1884, Page 3

A LEGAL. LOTTERY.

Those roadors who paid any attention to a short telegram from Dunedin the other day stating that "in the case of Ward v. National Bank, the Court found for appellant on all the issues,'' had probably little idea that the suit referred to gave a complete illustration not only of " the law's delay," but of its sweet uncertainty. A Southern contemporary gives the following amu&ing sketch of the history of theca.se: — Some years ago, we forget exactly when, but it seems to have been quite in the dim and distant past, a business man at Timaru, named John King, had an overdraft at his Bank— the National — a circumstance in which at that time he was by no means peculiar. In the course of his affairs, he found himself subjected to that unpleasent process which the most tender - hearted bankers sometimes find themselves compelled to resort to in order to secure an equitable division of profits between their shareholders and their customers. He was pressed to pay off his overdraft or to ofle. security for ib. He the latter alternative, and got -Judge Ward amongst others to guarantee Ihe overdraft to the extent of £1,000. Then he came to unutterable grief, and presently vanished from the scene. The Bank applied to Judge Ward for payment of the £1,000 with interest; but he, after sundry negotiations, refused to pay first the interest, and then the principal", on the ground that his co-guarantors had been released without his consent, and that his guarantee had thus become null and void. On this issue the Bank sued Judge Ward in the Supreme Court ; but when the caso came on, no evidence Mas called, and the Bank consented to a verdict for the defendant on the facts, and decided to apply to the Couit of Appeal for a judgment on the law, non obstante vercUic/o. That is to say, they asked the Court of Appeal to dekuethat, admitting all the facts alleged by Judge Ward, the Bank were still entitled to the £1,000. The Court of Appeal decided that it was .so. Judife Waid appealed to the Privy Council, and, alter about siv months' delay, the Privy Council upheld the judgment of the Coiut of Appeal. Judge Ward took no notice of this decision, and eventually the Bank sued him again in the Supreme Court at Timaru for the amount of his guarantee, with interest and costs. This time a sort of compromi.se Avas arrived at. The co.sts wore divided ; the claim to inteie^t was abandoned, and it wa. agreed that the tl ,OOU should be deposited by .Judge Ward at interest, pending a new tiial at Dunedin, m which the buna fides of the Bank in accepting the guarantee in the iii.it instance weie to be investigated. If the Bank won the case, they were to ba<; the ' 111,000I 1 1 ,000 with inlciest to date. If Judge Watd won it, then he was to take back his deposit with interest, and the Bank were to be pent empty away. The trial came on recently, and Judge Watd got a verdict on all the i-a'ues. lEe therefore scoops in his original i'l,ooo with interest and co.-ts ; and all the litigation which has been going on for years past is absolutely thrown aw ay ! After reading this perplexing record of .«eel saw litigation, one might be excused if he concluded that the practice of the 'aw demands the very highest qualifications in, its professors, if a clear understanding of" its intricacies is con&ideied e&sential. The lellection is alto pardonable that a reform of our legal system is at least as much needed as is a re-adjus«tment of the conditions of entrance to the legal profession.