DISTRICT COURT.

Thames Star, Volume IIII, Issue 1701, 16 June 1874, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

H T r ?His pay,, ■ j'"-*-:: (Before His Honor Jiidgo Beckham.)! , Tin 3 case was adjourned from last. ■court daylwithoiit ctfsts;f;f Since? then the; plaintiff's solicitor, MrDodd, discontinued sthe action; rt •.:?• -i xvyMrivih i.<:v;% ; Mr Macdonald applied for costs on be.half of defendant^)-;, ■•■■■id. ,---=; mo ; J Mr Dodd objected, but after referring to the rules tf the Court, the Judge allowed defendant's costs, £4 15s—counsel 3andfGpurt(.iees;.- : £r^ ,-:?■>■_ jfg.-y?- i *'' P. DONELLY V. P. W. DONELLY. i The plaint set forth.* that this, suit fa brought for the sum of iJIOO, for that the defendant .on^or about the month of 5 March, 1874," unlawfully ancTwrongfully converted to his own, use, ; or a -wrongfully., deprived of the use' and" possession of a ■ post letter of the plaintiff ,'s, and addressed to the p'laintiffy and for'thai the defendant on .ox about the ,24th, day of March, 1874, reelivecSNmd heid a post letterjof the plaintiff. >, and, addressed to .plaintiff, and"with%*fbiF]cn6wlf3ge J&fifie-^rezaigjsst" wrongfully and improperly^ open the said letter, and read the cohtetits thereof^ and d sclosed.the same, and delivered the ■saifcieWsr todivefs persons, and although:l often requested by ; the plaintiff to deliver to him'the" paid^lette^ reTused^; but dis-: regarding his duty in that behalf, wrongfully, unlawfully and improperly detained the same from the .plaintiff for a long •pace of time—to wit four weeks and tip-wards^-M :'.h:-"i .h-'M ?•-?-■ •.'/'■•.■• ?< ■ I ... ■ The case was brought on for trial before fa juryof four* vs ■•- '\-:y*h-::*-y •■:•!";. :-;.iA;| '' Mr Brassey for the plaintiff; Mr Tyler with Mr Macdonald for the defendant. --;

Charles Ahier, W. Adcock, E. J. An- > grpyo, Henry Adams, Win. Armstrong, Henry Brown, Alexander Barchard, John Butfc,. Benjamin- .Berriman,. Charles; Butterwofth, Edwin Binriey answered to their names., _ ■ '.- . i7i <:; ;; , f o ;h-r ; Mr Binney pleaded deafness as disqualifying him from the duties of« juryman, r ?f ■ f-i. ,t fi -v) ; ■ His Honor'stated that the plea could .not npwbe entertained.. ,„, .„. .'.....,, i ■.. * ;^£fglif4ianie^Veri§''itrtt^'l(m^Vtha:'folv: lowing four being sw6rn:—Wm. Artnstrong, H; Bmwn, Benjamin Berriman JMuI; jChalJiw J."Butt^wpritbi ? itßehjamin Berriman was chosen foreman. : All witnesses were ordered but of tW 'CburVjr/^i.o'a^A.- x-?:::r.r/.-T -;.k : ' Honor oniseeing r the^ host of nesSes to be examined, suggested that the case -sshonld be'-'Settled-out 'of fCoixtt. Couii'seHn^m^d'inat'th^^ai^hppe^ of that. h>W-«teo <>« o;; .or.•»-:; | ■r ; ■ Mr; Brassey directed] the jury's attention to the prominent points in his client's case.- He stated that plaintiff md defendagt .had Jtnown each, o|her for spme years, and had been bin friendly terms. A long argument arose on %'point of eridence, whear/Mr/Macdonald.'informeE the Xii A client -wished I for nothing^to be burked or supprea»ed. \ Mrlfßrassey continued that hi» was an illiterate man, who could neither read nor write. :~:'r^ rtlX.^rii &k;Yj ■? ■'•i/ Patrick 1 Donnelly. >wa« J called and iexamined.by Mr,Jßrassejr,^andf aidrr-I am;* miner, residing iii Grahamstown. * I know "the defend«rnt;'haveiknown him the last fire years, During-that time I haveheem on friendly terms with him. He haslreceived some letters addressed to me. The name being the same the postman used to ieare jhenr with him, md, when r the defendant ; found rthey^were mine he sent them to ineii'' 't not^say if erer he_ opened,'_ any i o/ themV s I rieVer authorised hinrfo doistt On the 27th;. ; Marcb I asked him for a t lotter belonging |o me. He sai4 he had notgot one* K;l?itbld him I expected a c letter, from .Mr the lawyer. I told Hm that it wai^ about "Mr JVaser's case. ); -I r had a case in the Supreme Court about that time. I asked Mm to ■ s?nd the l»jbte,r>tq my house a^ soon as) he receired it. "' He said" he would dotso^ About a w«ek Aafter.lr saw^ him again at the sharemarket corner. I asked him if he had hsdia? letter yet, and he said riot. I • xid I waswondering why Idid not get =a. letter. „ _H,e Jpld^me that^ directly IhiedSo&al^hJeiy^buldi sen^ it < & my house. I shortly after ;again asked him if- he had got a letter. He, replied ";N"o."- I r met him. again at" the 'saime jVp3ace about three weeks, after the,first application. He came up to inie" .alaiaisaidihe liad ieenk*, paper, aM had ■ 3en my name «n it, about Mr. Fraser. will vbu sayiif you kry ; and settle the case ? I replied that I dtdmbtCcare about.-■scttii»gCit.. Ke slid* ?"'=l'i would sooner have it settled." ! I asked him if he was authorised to ask n»; H« said no, but had bid; a hint about it.

lie thought it would be better to settle it. I told him he might settle it if he could. I said "Do not attempt to settle it without a good sum of money to cover my expenses." He said he would have no hand in it unless he did so. I made other inquiries. I went to O'Dowd. I afterwards went to the Post Office. I went to O'Dowd's because a party of the same name as myself used to stay there. I got one letter ffom Mr. O'Dowd—not Jthe mm miming.. I rftflngni«i> frofcfr Jfiftfr»» and envelope produced. The first time II sIwT it was. on the 25tV April, Jin,,the Italian mme v l_wjwworking in i that mine when my "wife^canie'ft tKe-ifop of tb« shaft and threw tho letter do*^ the shaft. The letter: was in that efrfelope | (produced).:', "..rr,; o. : ./OMrJtfacdonahi':objected %itbe letter with its envelope. He. had no objection to the letter, but objected \6 '(&v envelope tijl pertain,,marks" on it were^auth^ntiv caled as 1 being made at th^post'officef *• Examinationjcohlinued—l came up the shaft and brought the r letter-with me. I cannot read.'' I asked JBairdldiead the letter to me. r I djd not know that the letter was in reference to an action when Baird readme letter.-It wasTtoUd:23rd April. --v*-: .-.-*- HI .•«f Mr ?yler B»id,that was, essentially an action in trover, and damages could not be recovered for. more'than %',, value of the article in,- question' unlew' special damages had' been' laid; wHich had not , be,en, done in this case. " i& :- "lieft'fi'ttiaV - -'* T"> I '3