YESTERDAY.-(Concluded)

Auckland Star, Volume XXVI, Issue 4417, 10 July 1884, Page 3

YESTERDAY.-(Concluded)

(Before His Honor Mr Justice Gillies.) William McKinlav v. L. D. Nathan- and CO.—Claim, £500 damages.—Mr H. Campbell for the plainliff, and Mr E. Hesketh for the defendants.—Tho plaintiff Is a hotelkeeper at Oropi, carrying on business near Tauranga, and tho claim arose out of tho alleged action of the defendants In breaking and onteiing his house. removing goods therefrom, and consequently injuring his business. The defence was that Mr L. 1). Nathan, but not the firm, had done so by virtue of a bill of sale held by him as trustee in Asher's ostate.—Mr Campbell contended that tho effect of the defence was to admit tho allegations set out in the claim.—His Honor took the same viow o,' the matter. The defoneo, without denying the statemont in tho uluim, said in effect, 'Somebody elso did it.'—Mr Heskcth submitted that there was every defence, viz., that the firm was sued, and that L D. Nathan did the things complained of in his capacity us trustee of Asher's estate, and not by tho firm.— Alter some fun her discussion the difficult}' was overcomeby thename "Laurence David Nathan" beingsubstitutedforthatoftheilrmasdefendant. Mr Campbell then opened the cuse, and William MclClnlay (plaintiff), James O'Keofe, Joseph Squilebal. and W. G. Johnson gave evidence in support of the claim.