GERALDINE R.M. COURT.
TO THE HEITOR. Sir,— Mr Baddeley’s remarks, as reported in your valuable paper on Thursday last, are very just as far as they go, but I do not think they show the real necessity ot making the rule that is laid down, lam a storekeeper in business, and have occasionally to issue summonses to get my money. Sometimes these summonses are issued in Qeraldine itself or its immediate neighborhood, and a very few hours will practically suffice to serve the defendant, who would still have his 48 hours notice without Mr Baddeley interfering by his rule. I really don’t - see why a hard-and-fast rule should be laid down that deprives me of the right I have at law to hare my case 'heard if I can secure that the defendant has his 48 hours’ notice. We all know the pains Mr Baddeley takes in the cases before him, but for all that it is a hardship to he put off for a fortnight when we have done ail that the l<uv requires, and whan, in point of fact, we want our money.—l remain, etc., A Humbugged Plaintiff. Geraldine, Feb. 21st, 1887.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TEML18870222.2.9.1
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Temuka Leader, Issue 1556, 22 February 1887, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
194GERALDINE R.M. COURT. Temuka Leader, Issue 1556, 22 February 1887, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in