BANK OF NEW ZEALAND CALL.

Auckland Star, Volume XXVII, Issue 202, 27 August 1896, Page 5

BANK OF NEW ZEALAND CALL.

CASES BEFORE MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

At the Magistrate's Court to-day, cases for non-payment of call in the Bank of New Zealand came before Mr Northcroffa, S.M,

The first heard was Bank of New Zealand v. William Basß3bt Williams. Defendant resides at Lake Takapuna. This was a claim to recover £51 and interest, being third instalment) of call in respect of 45 shares held by defendant in Bank of New Zealand. . Mr i Harina appeared for the Bank of New Zealand, defendant appeared in peraon. Mr Buckleton, accountant, gave evidence on behalf of the Bank. la "answer to Hi 9 Worship defendant said that he had a paralytic stroke lately and could not work. He had paid two calls—all that he could. He had no means and w«s 74 years of age. He had saved up and invested in the shares to make provision for his old age. Mr Hanna sad the directors were compelled to fake proceedings against all defaulting shareholders in justice to those who had paid up the call. It was not a case of persecution. Mr Northcrofs Baid that ab one time ib was looked upon as fortunate to have shares in the Bank of New Zealand ; now it was looked upon as unfortunate. He had no alternative but to give judgment for £53 11s 4d, with costs £5 Ss. In a second case, Bank of Now Zealand v. Mrs Madeline Gilmour, of Parnell, defendant did not appear. Plaintiff Bank claimed £33 6s Bd, being first, second, and third instalment of call in respect of 10 shares held by her in the Bank and interest. Judgment was given for £35 7a 10d, with costs £3 la.

In other casea judgmenb waa confessed or struck oub,