Thursday, September 15.

Tuapeka Times, Volume III, Issue 137, 22 September 1870, Page 5

Thursday, September 15.

(Before W. L. Simp-Jon, Esq., RI., and Alex. Stewart, E-q. J.I1) Ward v. Tolcher.—Claim of £-4 4s, professional costs for preparing a security. Mr. Gooday appeared for the plaintiff. The defendant in person. He pleaded not indebted. Mr. Gooday said that in March, 1869, the plaintiff prepared a bill of sale for the defendant, for which an exceedingly small charge had beeu made, as the defendant had urged that his circumstances were not prosperous. He had failed to pay the amount, although he had frequently admitted the debt, promised to pay, and apologised for the delay. Latterly he had ignored hi 3 obligation, but offered half the amount. He called Mr. J. L. S, Keen (late clerk to plaintiff) who deposed to the facts as stated by the learned counsel, and produced the original bill of sale signed by the defendant. sThe defendant said that he had never gave instructions for the work, but admitted that he had signed the document and had received the benefit of it. The Bench said that it was a rule weu established, that the borrower paid for the mortgage, and that it was by no means necessary for the instructions to be given actually by the borrower, so long as he acknowledged the matter by accepting the document—in fact it was well known that the lender always had the power of employing his own solicitor, and the borrower had no option in the matter. So much was this the case, that solicitors always considered it an advantage to have money lenders as their clients. Moreover, it was exceedingly unwise as a rule to j:o to law with lawyers, as they were generally the best judges of their own rights—knew the ropes better than the people, and were not likely to sue without having firm ground under their feet. Verdict for the amount claimed, with costs.