Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DISTRICT COURT.

MASTERTON.-THURSDAL

[Befoke His Honor, District Judge Kettle.] fencing claim. $

The case Lee v. Puhara Te fa and others was continued after w went to press. Frederick Lee gave ovidence thii in 1887 and 1890 ho was the occupis of lands in Blocks XIV. and XV Kopuaranga Survey District, am had erected the boundary fenc between bis property and the Nativ, Block, Piihoe, which at thattiim had not gone through the Mm Land Court. The cost of the fence including everything, was aboui 25s per chain. Part of the fence was erected in 1887 and tin remainder in 1890 Before commencing the balance of fencing. Ik. saw Puhara Te Tau, in company with Mr W. lorue, and got an assurance that as soon as the land went through the Court, the defendants in the present action, would pay their share of the cost of fenoinjt if they were awarded the Block4fl'y expected.

The defence was a general denial of any agreement, After considerable evidence and legal argument, it was arranged that tho jury agree as to tho value of tho fence, His Honor to give judgment on the non-suit points ut 10 o'clock on Friday morning.

FRIDAY. His Honor, in giving judgment this morning, said that in this case the plaintiff sought to recover the half value of a boundary fence from threo aboriginal natives whose property adjoined. In his opinion, the evidence adduced was wholly insufficient to show that any agreement had been mado on the part of the Natives to pay plaintiff half the cost of the feuco. The conversation in August, 1890, appeared »e merely _a oasual conversation.Hlo was eatisSed from tho eridenoe that the defendants were not the occupiers when tho notice was served, and therefore not liable, He therefore found that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover against the Natives, and would be nonsuited with costs, IN IiAKKIiUIICr, James Peters, sboomaker of Carterton, applied for his discharge from Bankruptcy, Applicantstatedfcliatlioattrilmled his bankruptcy to the large amount of sickness in his family at Carterton.

In answer to His Honor, ih» applicant stated that he had a familr of eight, and was not in a position to pay his creditors or mak<' amoffer. J

In answer to Mr Achesou, who appeared on behalf of Mr Proctor ono of the creditors, applicant'said that his wife was now carrying on the business, and paid witness seven shillings a day for doing the wok of the business. In 1894, had Mmpromise with his creditors. Mr Fairbrother took over bankrupt'sliabilities, having heon left over £255 in stock, book debts, and. property, with which he was (o settle with the Carterton creditors. Subsequently went to Ekclahuna, whore he commenced business with. £SO worth of stock, and liabilities to the extent of £6O. Had never received any account of howMr Fail-brother had settled with the Carterton creditors. Was still owing Mr Fairbrothersome £SO. Took Mr Seaton into the business as a working partner, he having put some £SO into the business, and had not being able to pay him the mono but tried to meet tho interest on the capital. Filed in March of the present year for £3OO, which represented stock bought and unpaid forwhich when sold went to pay the. present dividend, This JtiUO' was incurred during "he; twelve months bankrupt was in: business in Eketabuna, Seaton put, his money into the business aw partner, and jointly signed bills Uv stock required for the business, to tho amount of some £l2O. Bankrapt agreed to learn Seaton the trad* on condition that £SO was to be put into the business, on which sum interest would bo paid to Seaton, At tho time of partnership bankrupt, was owing some £SO, to meet which he had assets to the extent of £6O iu stock and book debts. Filed owing to Mr Proctor pressing him for some £7 that was owing, Seaton had to fdo owing to his being pressed to meet certain liabilities incurred, by the partnership between I hem, In answer to His Honor, the bajft!rupt stated that Mr Fairbrofher put Mrs Peters into the business, allowing her twelve months in wlivA topay for the stock lately owiujiL' witness,

Mr W. B. Ohennells, the Official Assignee, elated that the hank-nipt kept a sort of cash book, tho witiL in which was so illegible that it was impossible to gain any reliable information as to his financial position. ' His Honor said he could not -rant a discharge, but would suggcsUlmt the application be adjourned tmtif the noxt sittings, when lit- Vnivbrother would be called upon to render an account of tho transactions between lumself and (he bant nipt and his wife. Discharge cop id not be granted in any case'on the. grounds of bankrupt not haviufc kent proper account books, sky',,,,, 4 position in business. °

IN re WIUIAM fj RATON • William Seaton, n, partner of -'l-ho previous bankrupt, also applied'for 1 % 0 „, was similar to that given in the--Fovious bftnkl )t gfHl . that hQ bad an interest ina payment section near Ekelafrna- / along witbbisbrotlier.whichinSlsS' <~ he sold out, putting £SO of thy money ,nto the shoemaking busiaw . of Mr Peters. He had somen™* abovo tbis, which he epont in vj; ousways. Understood that l,r JW ,c liable to meet tho debts himself and Peters whilst i ' that it was his fault thatl Q , mt "to the present position, .JM '■: only instructed Mr P O )J J " ; ately been C a.toton and Grey own, *ambg £1 a week ' JoardandloW WaU ™ngi! *■>, man,a n d could s see. ee that he bad made : ' '■ a great mis ta' £e in go ing into the business at al'i. fi s His Honor..gtTOted the discharge, ■' ' ; '■ on condition that banirupt paid '■'.■?•■. 10s m the on all proved liabilities '.'; -? °™g to Messrs Bing, Harris and ■ fc'ti K which liabilities had to be V^ proved ty the said firm, within one -^0 month from date, due notice to bo .' % g'W by the Official Assignee. No ;- ;; ® doulri the bankrupt hud daun a : v '^ foohsh thing in going info"JP)e '-^lO. Business as he had done, without -iH;iv any knowledge of it, and be had paid ''?>s§ somewhat dearly for his experience, J^M | IS«J.H.BRDNTON. %til John Neil Brunton, tailor of Mas- £*'& l

terton,appliod for Iris discharge, The bankrupt appeared on his own bebalf,.and stated that he had caused notices of the application to bo j served on his various creditors, In I « further evidence, baukrupt said ho < had had several transactions in land ,- - purchases, being at such time in a: solvent position. Had been pre- ; vented from working during some three months by illness, A traveller bad inducod' him to expend some £lO, on condition that credit would be given for some £SO woith of tweeds, which did not arrive in I , Benson, owing ,to some delay in in the shipment of the goods, therefore resulting in a heavy loss of business to bankrupt. His Honor said that no doubt bankrupt had been somewhat unfor- j tunate in his business transactions, I and had apparently acted in a straightforward way, and if not pressed by one of the crediting firms, would probably have endeavoured to meet his liabilities. However, thero was one thing be must tako exception to, and that was the bankrupt's not keeping a proper statement of I 4hccounts, or the necessary hooks;, ▼ required to be kept by law, and;] owing to which fact the bankrupt's' discharge would bo suspended for i six months.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WDT18950628.2.4

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XVI, Issue 5063, 28 June 1895, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,242

DISTRICT COURT. Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XVI, Issue 5063, 28 June 1895, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT. Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XVI, Issue 5063, 28 June 1895, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert