Untitled

West Coast Times, Issue 233, 21 June 1866, Page 2

Wo take the following from tho "Daily Times," of the Bth instant :— " For two years and a half, Slato v Morris or Morris v Slate, has constantly been appearing in our law reports. It has been Jarndyoo v Jarndyco on a small scale. Morris was a settler in the Peninsula district, and Slate, an old acquaint" ance, wont there, and at first worked for Morris. In 1861, if not earlier, according to Slate's account, there was an agrooment that he was to havo ten aoroa of Morris's land, for L2O ; and tho |L2O was paid and possession taken. Morris donies that there was ever suoh a payment or oven suoh an agreement j and one branoh of the struggle was commonoed by his forcibly ejeoting Slate from the land. Slate followed by an action to recover certain documents to give him legal title to the ten acres. It would be painful, even if profitable, to trace tho contest through all its phases. From tho first, Slato has been tho successful party in Court; and from the Waste Land Board ho has got a Crown Grant. Morris has never yet yielded. Ho has twico filed a sohodule i* insolvency ; he has been seven months in prison, being kept there by a detainer for law oxpensos j ho has, according to his own ao« count, ceased to possess anything. But he had convevod somo 80 acres of land to his vrifo i and yestorday' the Supreme Court was ocoupied in trying issues with a view to a deoree as to whether or not that settlement should be declared to be void, as defeating, hindering, delaying, or defrauding Slate, who is a oroditor for over L2OO, L6O of which is the amount of a verdiot, and the balance thy amount of costs carried by that verdiot. Tho case is roportod elsewhere. The findings were all against Morris; and the deoreewill no doubt be that Mrs Morris must givo up tho land, &o. An application was made to have Morris released from oustody j but his Honor said that tho application must be renewed in Chambers, after notice to tho de* taining creditor."