RHODES V. RHODES.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 5, Issue 1279, 16 January 1883, Page 2

RHODES V. RHODES.

The London- correspondent' the Dunedin Star'writes ia ■ 'iollow.B.rHer | -Majesiy in .her. Priory OpMn.flil^ ; uow had many iniportant colonial appeal to decide, but none appear Volved larger issues than the great' New Zealand will case, of Bhodis V Rhodes, recently decided. ■■ It 1 will :bb.remembered that though the Lords of tjie Council ruled in fayor of, the appellant.(Misi.Uary,Ann. Rhodes). ihereby\upa eti ng. the deciaion of the' Supreme Court at .Wellington, tbey directed that'the cOsts of al) parties should be paid out of the estate;' Three sets of solicitors were engaged, and the argument lsßted six days, The importance of - the appeal,.and the anxiety of the Government to give the petitions of colonial subjects due attention, is shown by the fact that, besides the four: ordinary. Judges,[Lord Blackman and Lord] Watson attended the hearing. The costs incurred in England have now been taxed, aud amount to the good rouud sum uf Mr Benjamin, Q. 0., the applicant's leading had 250 guineas ,on his brief, besides refreshers and consolation fees every day; and the Attorney-General, acting for the inext of kin, had a like >Bum. There were also two,junior counsel on each side, and the trustees'paid' 100 guineas to' counsel to watch the case on their behalf. These costs aro in addition to those incurred in Now Zealand, so tliat the lawyers seem'to bave had iully their fair share of the late Barney Bhodes's £4,000,000. It may be interesting to mention that the fortnuate litigant (Miss Mary Ann. Rhodes) heard" her oase argued before she returned home, audhad the honor ot hunting with the Empress of Austria'. •