SUPREME COURT—Wednesday. (Before His Honor Sir George Arney, Knt., Chief Justice, and a Special Jury.)

Waikato Times, Volume VIII, Issue 420, 23 January 1875, Page 2

SUPREME COURT — Wednesday. (Before His Honor Sir George Arney, Knt., Chief Justice, and a Special Jury.)

Chitty v. Jolly. — Mr Rees and Mr Joy for the plaintiff, and Mr Hes'keth and Mr Jame? Russell for the defendant. This cnse was part heard on. Tuesday. Matthew de Vere Hunt, a settler, residing in Hamilton, ,au<^ father-in-law .of the Plaintiff, corroborated the evidence? as to the exchange of bull-calf for a heifer calf, and said it was a bona *fide_ .transaction.* •; Witness and the plaintiff had also exchanged labor, the farms being contiguous to each other. It was: a fair exchange, the plaintiff allowing witness the service of a man named Channey and receiving the benefit of work done by witness's sons. — John Wood, a butchar, corroboi*ated the , evidence given by the plaintiff as to pui£ chases of stock made from him.- The bull-calf 16 question was a good one, and suitable for breeding purposes if kept. The plaintiff got' it back again and exchanged it to Mr, Hunt. — Thomas Hill, another butcher, also deposed j to having purchased cattle from Chitty and having regarded him as the manager of the farm. — William.Nicholas Searancke, ;R.M., Waikato, deposed that on the Ist April, the "defendant accompanied by Captain Dawson, came to his office and wanted to lay an information against Chitty for stealing the calf. He detailed all the circumstances. Witness had known Mr Chitty for about two years, and always considedecl him respectable and well conducted. He advised Me Jolly to think over the' matter for 48 hours, and told him that if at the end of that time he was still of the same mind ho (witness) would take the information. The defendant - came again, and She warrant was issued. The case was heard before witness and Mi' 'Hammond. The charge'was dismissed, without Mr Chitty being culled bii for his defence. 'Mr Jolly applied for an adjournment to get a solicitor,, but it was refused. Mr Madden and Mr Leary appeared for Mr Chitty. Did riot/know whether .there were any more solicitors .at .Hamilton. Witness had, while in company with several others at the hotel t at Hamilton, heard the plaintiff referred to as the man who had been charged with cattle stealing, He had not seen him much about since. — Captain Steele, a land agent and settler in the Waikato, deposed that the plaintiff first spoke to him about purchasing Conine's farm. He said he could command £1000 by means of drafts upon his father. Witness told him that, he being a stranger, if he could get his cousin to become a joint purchaser and endorse the bills, he would sell the farm. Eventually a deposit was paid on the purchase of £300, _by a draft given by Mr Chitty on his father, and endorsed by Mr Jolly. Wilness received £45 as commission- from the defendant for an undertaking to advance the balance of the pu.ichase-money (£1,500) on mortgage. At the same time witness drew up a memo, of terms of -partnnersbip. The divifb had been paid by Mr Jolly's father, and the defendant had completed the* purchase, and now had possession of the farm.—^Thomas Jolly, the defendant, deposed that he did nothing to induce j the plaintiff to come out to the colony. Wit- ' ness 'agreed to join in the purchase of the farm, chiefly on his cousin's account, as he had another' farm of his "own which required all his attention. The bull calf hvquestion was by a bull belonging to Mr McLean, out of his best -cow 1 , and when he sent it to the farm he told his cousin- that he wanted to keep it. After, receiving inteliingenco of the-p^yntent ofthe draft by Ins father, he went to the plaintiff who siid something v about its being all the fault of his brother George, and proposed to from the partnership. ■- Witness agreed to keep him on the farm rand give him 6s a°day, with., a promise to, TemembsivMm if the farm -seld at a profit-. .Selcjpnfcj isitetf the farm, ffis reasons •for laving the information^Kere— that he had lost confidence in his cousin oi^accouAt of his misstntements as to the money he was to receive from home, and his untruthfalness in the arbitration matters, besides the disposal of cattle which he did not explain. When witness laid the information he did not know anything about an exchange of calves. He had heard from Channey that Hunt had had a ■ cow and a calf for two months, that Hunt had borrowed a horse and not roturned it, and that •G.ianney had been sent to work at HuhtV "Kone ! of these things were explained to witness by the plaintiff. DM not know anything about fhe heifer calf until aft ?r the information was laid. Captain

jjawson told mj^s^llMJ^SJle^ young Hunt driving a cowjaalil a a y^^^L%3^ and that his t haa3p jeen t le^je i^fe^d to drive out f&e calf,^t it^ohld no ; g|Mthlg£the cow. After 'w|s^ess daw. the calf at iliij'ii, hflfrent away with Qa"sftain J|iwssnl ; and j alml thj^Eitter over seri9$W- Hswty'tfftoifapte wga^&sce Searancke." T^,^hen'#en^<s Mrl^ajj^pfer' After they had talked the mutter over, toTdivitness that as Chitty was his coitgrfp', it was a serious niatter, and lie had }*ottOTtakeadajr to thinlc over it... WheiLwitnoaa laid the in'fdrinatSon, Jiralid Aofclnow the difference between a warrant and a summoife. . i&e did not wish to lay an information "before Mr Searaneko aganist Ghitty for vmjw^^lin^SSSlS crSS. examniett by Mr Rees, .aiidAheSfavthei^Bring of the case was adjourned till Thursday morning at m^ o clock. ? •