Road Board Amenities.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume X, Issue 3202, 11 May 1889, Page 3

Road Board Amenities.

The first meeting of the newly : elected members of thoWhareaum "-Road Board whioh took'place on Friday, assumed a new phase by electing Mr H. R. Elder as its Mhairnian. As a result of the Board's election, the whole of the old. members, with one exception, were ' returned, and the strong party feeling which had existed in the past, again ran very high. The newly elected member was eagorly sought after prior to the Board b first meeting, and all kinds of inducements held out if he would only consent to give his vote in favor of such and such a person as chairman. Although new to publio sorvicc, the new member wm not so easily to be gulled, and without giving offence to either section cf thevßoard, put off tho time of reckoning until tho eleventh hour. Both parties were sure of his support, and on tho morning of the meeting great was the joy of the ex-Chairman & Co, as they drove the waggonette to our hero's residence to find, after a littlo persuasion, that ho had not the slightest objection to accompany them. Beaching the place of meeting another deputation was in waiting to receive and congratulate the new member. At such |iin ovation it is hardly surprising that miis promised support was killed by over-indulgence soft soap, As the time of meeting approached all kinds of persuasions were brought to hear by each party to his evident disapproval. Shortly after 11 a.m., three out of six members found thoir

. way to the meeting room. A quorum being present, Mr Diehard Meredith' proposed that Mr E. Meredith should take the ohair. A pause ensued—but no seconder. Mr Meredith then intimated somewhat seriously, as no one else was prepared to support his candidature, he would second his own nomination. In order to carry the resolution Mr Meredith Jun. left the room to try and induce the new ' member to come in and support it, 7 As soon as he left, Messrs Morrison i and Moore entered. Mr Meredith : junr. not returning, Mr Meredith Bonr. also left the room. As they j did not return, and tho time of the , Board was being wasted, Mr Moore proposed, and Mr Morrison seconded, that Mr Elder take tho ohair, The ■ motion was about to be put when Mr senr. hurried into the room ▼and told the Clerk he would oblige him by packing up tho papers and adjourning the meeting as the time j allowed by law had expired, • The , other members of the Board declined ]

to uphold what they considered a flimsy oxcuee, and decided to go on with the business, This the oxchairman would not agree to and again left the room. When Mr Elder's nomination was about to bo declared, the clerk drew attention to Mr Meredith's nomination. Both gentlemen were then put to the vote with the result thatMrEldcrwasclectedunanimously as Chairman of the Board for the ensuing year. The Clerk was then called upon to read the minutes of the last meeting. At this stage Mr B. Meredith returned and was in. formed that the business of the meethad, with Mr Elder as its HE Chairman, commenced. At this announcement' ho appeared very |Bymicl) agitated and threatened to all proceedings, which he 'strongly condemned as illegal. He finished bi3 effusion to the amusement of the Board by telling them his remarks were not prompted by any personal feeling. This outburst was followed by a'written protest, which the Board could not spare the time to peruse, and on the suggestion of one of the members wa3 laid upon the table as a fitting momento of the days that are no more. Under the new regimo the rest of the Board's business was transacted without further trouble.

Supreme Court-

Wanoanui, May 10. At the Supremo Court an important case, the Bank of Australasia versus the Patea Building Society (claim for £1229 Gs sd), Las lasted two days. Mr Fitzherbert appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr Barnicoat for the defendants. In opening tlie case, Mr Fitzherbert said a cash credit bond was the subject in dispute, r The execution and claims were . Admitted, but the defence set forth jp'was certain legal objections. He •would put in the bond and admissions, and that would close his case, except that he would have a right to call rebutting evidence. He put m the bond, and asked His Honor to note that the demand made as alleged for L 1192 13s 3d principal, and LBol2s 2d interest on the 13th August, 1888, was acknowledged to have been made, and the amount was still due and unpaid, with interest accruing. His Honor raised tbo point as to whether the defendant Society were sued as jointly and severally responsible, and though Mr Fitzherbert claimed that ha liued in both capacities, the point was not settled. Mr Barnicoat said that the defenco was really that the bond was obtained under misrepresentations to the sureties at the time. It was principally to tho effect that the sureties in signing were not to

inour any personal responsibility , whatever; that it was usual for -.'■* directors so to sign because the bank required it. When the book was signed in 1883 the bank had a bond, tjfeit apparently wanted something better. One of the then bondsineu (Wm. Dixon) was a bankrupt, another was a bankrupt, one (Uay- . wood) had no means, Keys was dying one man had left the oolony. \ Mr Norman, the Bank Manager, had • 'this inducement to get somo raoro solvent gentlemen on the bond, and it seemed impossible that they would have signed tho bonds had they known what they were doing. Only one of the signatories had £2OOO of ' interest in the Society', the othors being only nominally interested. At . Mr Norman attended and produced tho new ,' -bonds, which he represented would not make them personally liable. . The evidence of tho signatories was • taken, as. well as that of Messrs r 'Norman and Webstor, bank man- . < agers at Patea. Hi 3 Honor took about two hours to sum up, and the

v jury then retired, returning to Court with tho following answers to • .-the issues:—l. (a) Did Mr fliforman represent to tho defendants ~.that they would incur no poraonal lia- •• bility whatever by signing, Answer; Yes. (b) That the said bond was a mere matter of form ? Anfiwer: Yes, (c) That the defendants would never be called on to pay any money v. under such bond? Answer: Yes. '., (d) That a bond in similar terms was . always signed upon a change of . Directors of a oorporate body owing monoy.toabank, Answer: Yes. 2, jl; That if the defendants dgned the jj- bond they would only do so as Pireotors of the Boowty, for foe

purpose of binding the said Society, and not for the purpose of rendering themselves personally liable. Answer: Yes. 2.. Were such representations untrue? Answer: Yes, '2. .Were they untrue to the knowledge of Mr Norman? Answer: No. '4. Were they made witli the object that they should be acted upon by the defendants by executing the samo bond ? Answer: Yes. 5, Were the defendants induced by such representations to eseouto the said bond ? Answer: Yes. His Honor reserved judgment till to-morrow.