ARTHUR CONINGHAM AGAIN

New Zealand Tablet, 27 August 1908, Page 13

ARTHUR CONINGHAM AGAIN

A « RIDICULOUS AND EXTRAVAGANT CLAJM'

of A^usTt I- fOllOWi " g reP ° rt fr ° m thG *«".*«"««4 TW 'A more preposterous claim it has never been my lot to hear of, let alone adjudicate upon,' said his Worship in deUvtrln* h>s reserved decision in a case in Arthur Conlnlham sum o a f sZ neC Th' agCnt> h3d HB " C " tne sum of £ 13 6. Th 1S amount was made up as follows — *zz c t r1?r 1 ? s vpev pcc rlyr Iy securing the w'isituated m the Armch ai r Creek, Marlborough, known as the hS S ChOke f im> ClOSdy Watchi^ Claim ' a«enX g B! enJ- ua y':^ sccu^"' **' ~ tio " '* int^ng^d

anotS P°f t|es ; | remarked his Worship, were jointly interested in onothei cla.cn, he good qualities of which they abandoned after the defendant had spent a considerable sum in exploiting it. Itl th? h' 7"r T'' Pl ° POrtiOn ° f * had found '«* way into the hands of the plaintiff. On the latter', advice, they had aTjZl^ T " thCir attCnti ° n tO an ° ther claim »i fa, ZI: thC T defCn , dant ' , as '» the <«■««■ case, finding the nece*orv funds. The pla.nt.flf seemed to have spen t his time between the armchair on the rroek, Blenheim, and Wellington, and now sought from the defendant a slight douceur in the shape of one hundred and thirty-six pounds, no shillings, and no perub°ut rr r fh UOUS , Iab ° r -; HC (Dn McArth «) ™* not quite*,™ but that the claim, if any, should not have been made in the \\ardens Court, but was prepared to give the defendant th« benefit of the doubt and consider the case. Plaintiff appeared to have been instrumental insetting the defendant to spend some of her money on the 'Armch.a.ir' ;n-preference; - npreference to continuing to pay out on the former venture ' He telephoned the solicitor in Blenheim, and saw 'him in co.mpanv with defendant, attended the court at Blenheim', pegged out:.« claim and sat in the ' armchair ' when he was not in Blenheim or Welhngton. In doing this he claimed to have spent sixty-fiv* days for which he claimed the pittance of 20s per day, in all a mere £65. This, by the way, did not include the arduous toil ' of pegging out the claim, a few hours' work, for which he - .-was modest enough to ask a meagre £ S . His excursions from Blenheim to the « armchair \ and the rest cure for twelve days in Blenheim he had valued at £16. Astonished at his o^vn moderation in these demands, he had proceeded into round figures for ' introducing and securing,' which he estimated at thus making the total of his claim the aforesaid It would have been tedious to enter into the plaintiff's side of the story, proceeded Dr. McArthur, but as an indication be would mention that he had denied having received the sum cf .£23, although his receipt was produced and acknowledged by him to have been wholly in his own handwriting. The Blenheim solicitor had saidthat he understood from the defendant that the pontiff was her agent in the matter, and on that gro.unjd^a.nd -that one only— was his Worship prepared to allow him spmejfbVg for the- little he had done. He considered he would be amply repaid if he fixed the amount at Considering the ridiculous - and extravagant nature of the claim, no costs would be allowed.