IN PAWN.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LV, Issue 103, 17 September 1912, Page 5

IN PAWN.

A GISBORNE CASE. By Telegraph. —Press Association. 'Gisborne, September 12. A somewhat unusual case was heard before Mr. W. A. Barton, S.M., today. Alfred John Mossong (for whom Mr. Bright appeared) claimed from R. Morton (ilr. Coleman) the sum of £ls. Evidence for the defendant had been taken in Auckland. Bright stated that some time ago a watch and chain valued at £l2 10s was handed to Morton in security for an account of £1 2s. The account had been paid, and it was desired that the watch should be returned. His Worship intimated that there was also a claim for damages, and if he found that the watch had been wrongfully detained he might have to allow some damages. Mr. Coleman said that the watch and ! chain should have arrived by this time, as it was his client's intention to return the timepiece now that the account had been paid. Edith Mossong, wife of the plaintiff, deposed that she owed Morton, Ainsworth and Co., Auckland, £1 17s, and on informing the firm that she was going to Gisborne, she was told that the account would be sent on. As the boat was leaving for Gisborne, defendant came to the wharf and told witness that if she did not settle the account he would have her arrested. On being told that she had no money, defendant asked for , some jewellery as security. Defendant also wanted security for the rent of Mrs. Ritclrs house, in which plaintiff had been living. Witness explained that she had made arrangements with her landlady about the rent. Being afraid of arrest, witness handed over her husband's watch, for which a receipt was given. To Mr. Coleman: She did not remember if anybody spoke to her about her coal account of 8s (id. Mr. Coleman addressed the Court, pointing out the facts in the evidence for the defence taken at Auckland, which pointed to the fact that the watch and chain were taken only for security. His Worship stated that lie was of opinion that the watch had been obtained under pressure, and he ordered that the goods lie returned, and damages of £1 were allowed, with costs ,C 3 Bs.