Permanent link to this item
MAGISTERIAL., Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 2076, 1 March 1889
I ASHBURTON— THURSDAY, (Before Mr 0. A. Wrav R/M.) ; ▲LLBOXD rOROIBLB ENTBY. In the oase against Hago Fnedlander, Charles William Parneil, Frank Stitjley, William Halsall, Thos. Morgan, John Maudsley and William Townshend, yesterday, the following evidence was taken after we went to press : H. H. Secretan m cross-examination by Mr Parneil (»ld :— Witness was shown the agreement (produced) between Frledlander Bros and Mtkeig, *nd was told that Priedlander relied on It for their possession. On Saturday, February 9, when witness tock possession he did uot give Friadlandorß* notice that day ; he wrote from RakaU, and Frledlandera woold get it about half, haat ten on Monday the 11th. — By Mr Frledlander : Would swear that Fried-, lander's boy came to the cffioa on Saturday, February 9. Wltneis ooald hardly d »orlbe biic, but would know him if he saw him. Witness wonld swear positively that the big key was about on the Saturday ; wltnesi fitted it himself to the look —By Mr Fisher : As far as witness was aware his company never consented to the underlease from Makeig to Fried' lander Bros. He was not aware that the Borough Oounoll ever oomented. — By Mr Frledlaoder : Was not aware that Frledlander Bros held wool sales m the store or had any wool exhibited there. Might have been m the store during the months of November, Doiembor and January last. Had seen . bales of wool there at dlffarent times but could not say when. George Frederlok Somervllle Makeig, grain agent of Ashburton, leased the store from tho Loan and Mercantile 00. About March 1838 took m some grain for storage from Friadlanders, at per bag. Ii Auguit 1888 part of the wheat was still there. Is was 'arranged that witness wbb to keep the wheat till February 1, 1889 at 4d per sack, and If it went ont fitthln a month *ittess was to reoelve the Btme money. In August 1888, witness applied to Hago Frledlander for £50 on account of vtotage. He got the £50 m condition he leased the store to Friedlandera for three or six months. Finally a dooument was prepared by Mr Purnell, and signed on August 8. The document was not rigned as originally drawn. Hugo Fried. Under altered the period stated m the dooument from February, 1889, to November. Throughout the dooument this alteration was made, but the year was not altered It wag handed to witnesa to sign. Witness uaw that the month had beon altered, but did not notice that tbe year was unaltered —Mr Wilding atked if tie document convoyed tho intention of the parties, but the I question wu objected to and disallowed, ! as was also a question asking if the witneea would have signed the document had bo known it was altered.— Witness gavo up possession to Seoro'ao on February 9. Told Hn<?q Friedlander of hiß intention ; he aeked witness to let it stand over till Monday, February 11. Witness never had the sanctum of the Company to let the store to rriedlantlera ; the Company refused th,oir Banocion. JVever obtained the sanotion of the Borough OounoU. On tbe aftemcon cf fiatnrday, February 9, a boy m Mr FriedlantJer's employ aanje to the store where witness and Mr Seoretan w.erfl. Wgot out with the boy and saw Hugo Frledlander, He asked witness aboa giving np the storo, and wirnew replied that be had handed it over to the Company Witness had then signed the aurrond r and given up the kty 8 , and subsequently exercised no right as ten-mt Up to this time wilneiß had charge of the atore and bi6 boy locked it up and opened it. There Wer6 orner inings besides Friedlander'a stored there. On Monday, February 11 witness was driylgg towards the store when he mot Mr Friedlander. He atiked who was In the store ; witness r plied that he was going up to see. Witness found Keily there. Hugo Friedlander asked what rieht he had there and Keily replied that he had been plaord m charge of the store by Secretan, Friedlander said that Keily had better go out ac he had no right there and Keily rejoined that he would not go Friedlander said that if he did not go he would turn him out, Keily said that unless he got instructions from Seoretan he would not go out. Witness told Hugo Fried ander that bis tenanoy was np m f^ovember, 1888, but he made no reply and left the ntore then In about half an hour he oame buck * |th $w of the accused wen. When they oame m Hugo said to Keily that ho had t etter go or they would forcibly turn him otit. Koily refnaed to go and Friedlander then ordered the men to turn him out. l\e ly took up a atrong position behind a wool bale and showed fight. Before going behind the wool balo the men advanced towards him. Brown, a p.arpenter, was there taking a lock "off the door, and Friedlander told him to go on with tbe work, Keily ordering him not to. While Kei!y was disputing with Brown, Mr Purnoll arrived 9 i the scene. Friedlandf r said that Keily I would not po, and Ptirnell eaid " Turn aim out." Keily was at this time m the offio paesaee, Witness heard a' eonffle, and when ha came out m the pagßae there was no Ktily there. After the ejection witness bad a conversation with Friedlander relative to his tenancy of the store. Witness said "As sure as you are standing before me now, y.iu know it was only a three months' agreement." Friedlander did not adirit it or deny It, but naked witness when he was going to leave. Seme time before this witness had a convocation with Purnell about the agreement, and the alteration of the date. Purnell said it was all bosh, Friedlander could n,ot have witneea on a technical point like that, referring to Friedlaoder's neglect to alter the year as well as the month, — Mr Purnell pointed out that the witness wne at the time consulting him m reference to his p Bition with tho Company. Of course the witness cou'd give evidence if he liked, but he (Mr Purnell) would Ike the fact to go forth that it was a consultation between solioitor and client. —Witness oontinued : Mr Purnell drow up the .agreement between wituean and Friedlander. After wi^neis hsd stated the position to PurnelJ, he went to Friedlander, saw bim and brought back hia answer, which was a refusal to give up Ihe atore. Both Purnell and Friedlander knew that witness had npt o.btained the oonsent of the Company or Borough Council to the sub-lease. The foot that it was nooesaary waa mentioned to Mr Fried lander. Had a conversation with Mr Friedlander m which he mentioned that the Company coold not lease without ;he Council's consent. — At this stage the 3ourt adjourned to Monday "Rough on Piles."— Why suffer Piles? mmediate relief and complete cure guaraneed. Ask for " Rough on Piles." Sure cure ' or itching4protn;ding;|bJ W ding,gor any form • )f PUCBj |
MAGISTERIAL., Ashburton Guardian, Volume VII, Issue 2076, 1 March 1889
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.
Papers Past now contains more than just newspapers. Use these links to navigate to other kinds of materials.
These links will always show you how deep you are in the collection. Click them to get a broader view of the items you're currently viewing.
Enter names, places, or other keywords that you're curious about here. We'll look for them in the fulltext of millions of articles.
Browsed to an interesting page? Click here to search within the item you're currently viewing, or start a new search.
Use these buttons to limit your searches to particular dates, titles, and more.
Switch between images of the original document and text transcriptions and outlines you can cut and paste.
Print, save, zoom in and more.
If you'd rather just browse through documents, click here to find titles and issues from particular dates and geographic regions.
The "Help" link will show you different tips for each page on the site, so click here often as you explore the site.