DISTRICT COURT

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3469, 26 March 1890, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT

HASTERTOpWEMESDATf.'

(Bofoi'o His Honor District Judge : ' •'• : 'Robiiiso ; n). .. , ' The following jury waa em pau cllod: Messrs'A. M. Bradbury, I'. Dixon, E. Jones and'E.'M'cEweh. Mr E. McEwen was chosen foreman 1 . ; T. Garswoll v C, Riordah.-Part-uership, claim £2OO, Mr Pownall for plaintiff, Mr. Jeilicoo. for defendant, ■■':':.'-, . .

Mr Pownall, before opening the oaae, asked that an amendment in the shape of an additional relief be mado in the claim, but Mr Jellicoe objected on the grounds that the case was a partnership dispute, and the claim coulil not, therefore be amended. Mr Pownall contended- that the amendment would not affect the original claim, It was for the Court to decide whether there was, or was not, a partnership existing between the, two partios., If there was 1 not, a verdict should ha given, for the defendant, but if there was, an ordor should be mado that a receiver be. appointed,'ana that an account of the transactions should be taken, and the assets divided, The Court allowed tho' latter portion of the amendment, but stated it could not grant the whole. A considerable amount of controversy ensued between counsel, after whioh Mr Pownall stated his case, An arrangement had been made between plaintiff, (who is 18 years of age) and defendant, to outer into a partnership to pick up rabbit skins. A considerable number of skins had been procured,; and 10| bales had been sold to the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Company, Defendant had sold them in his own name, and. a quantity of skins were now oil hand. Plaintiff had not received his share, and altogether the claim as amended was for £179 7s , Cd, He admitted a small Bet-off, but would oil evidonce lo show that a partnership had existed, and that the amount claimed was owing. (AH witnesses were ordered out oi Court). Thomas Carswell, senr, sworn, deposed that lie was a hotelkeepei residing ; at' Whakataki. .Knew defendant, who had often spoken tc ■ him about the action, Saw him first on the matter in May last year, This conversation took place in hit ! own house. Defendant bad been ■ rabbiting at Cashpoint, butcaine tc 1 live at his place, Defendant aaltec 1 him if he did not think a good profii was to be made at picking up rabbii ; skins at Kahumingi. Told hini Ik 1 thought there was. Defendant asket j him.whathethouglittherightcouldbi ' purchased for, and he replied ho dii not know. Riordan said he thoughi it could bo got for LI 5, but eventuallj they paid L2O and got the right Defendant said,he would riot go intc tho business without his (witness' I son Tom as partner.' He said hi thought they would get on all righ as had been partners before ■ Told defendant that his son could g( ■ on condition ho (Riordan) conducted 1 the wlole affair. It was understood 1 and stated that the profits should bi divided, and the. defendant shouli have a fair share for his management >' He'was to act as working partner • There was no written agreement Asked for a written'agroemen subsequently. Knew the skins ha< • been bought off MrVallanco for L2( 3 because ho saw the recoipt, Ho di< 1 not know whether his son had mono; onough to pay his share. Defendant replied tkat it was all right, as the; ' had been together before, and he dii not want him (witness) to be rospon 1 sible. Hiordan told him something of the arrangements as to the rabbit ing, Riordan told his son not to tel 3 other rabbiteig ' that they wen i partners, else the rabbiters migh 1 become dissatisfied. After threi days' picking up defendant came t( 1 his house and said he thought the; i would make a good thing out of it A notice from Riordan to the effec 1 that persons found removing skim I from the, property would bo prose i cuted was put on his lamp post Defendant went into his house for i drink, and he then remarked tha there was only ono narno on th' notice and that did not look proper Defendant replied that .it was al right, and he concluded, with his son that it was. Heard defendant ant [ his son discussing as to what the; should do to prevent poaching. Aftei they finished the job he wen • to see defendant, and asked him t( • come to a settlement without furthei i bother., Defendant replied that hi 1 had offered his son money, but hi ■ refused to take it. Defendant.alsi ) asked if ho thought ho was such t ' dT—fool as to go into partner i ship with a boy,

Mr Jcllicoo asked that his cross examination of this witness be allowed to be deferred till after the hearing of the evidence of tho plaintiff.. The application was granted by tho Court.

(Left sitting.)