LEGAL INQUIRY COLUMN.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXIX, Issue 234, 30 September 1908, Page 8

LEGAL INQUIRY COLUMN.

■ Letters of Inquiry will be answered every Wednesday in this column. As far' as possible they will be dealt- with in the order in which they are received, and replies will ibe Inserted with the least possible delay. In order to derive the greatest advantage from this column, correspondents should give full particulars of the facts upen wnich they desire advice. Whatever tka I details supplied, however, bo responsibility can De accepted for errors, In whatever way arising, though every effort will be I made to insure accuracy. Answers are based absolutely en the information given, aud, therefore, in all instances, can only be applied to the specific case dealt wit*. Every correspondent must enclose his or her real name and full address, though not, of course, for publication. J.B. writes: —"A few months ago I made an application to the Government for a loan under the Advances to Workers Act. With the application. 1 sent the : requisite 7/G for valuation fee. In reply. I got a letter stating that I could not- get tbe money on the conditions . I wanted it under the Advances to I Workers Act. 1 was also informed that I could get it under the Advances to Settlers Act. Enclosed was a form to fill up: also a request to forward the balance to bring the valuation fee to I thirty shillings 130/). It was mentioned in the letter that as I could not get the money. they had not gone to the expense of valuation. I eventually got the money from a local braiding society. Am 1 entitled to have the seven shillings and sixpence (7/6) returned to mc?" [I think J.B. is entitled to the return of his money, and ought to write for it.] J.W.C. writes:—"l make further inquiries re my name over the shop in I'arnell. They absolutely refuse to take the name off. on the grounds that there are no , initials. Can I make any claim?" [I am afraid I cannot sufficiently recall the contents of J.W.C.'s former letter to enable mc to advise on it. If. however, his name is being used without his consent, be may apply for an injunction to stop it. but in that he will need professional assistance.] J. 0.8. writes: —"A owns a section on the opposite side of the road to B and C. Survey pegs are placed on both sides of the road. The road should be 100 links wide, but is found to be about 14ft short of that, measuring between the lines of the survey pegs. As place was surveyed before B*s and C"s. B"s and t"*s being brought under thte Land Transfer Act at the time their place was surveyed and pegged. The question is this: -floes the bringing of B's aud C's places under the L.T. Act absolutely fix their front boundary at the pegs put in at time of bringing them under that Act?* If such is the case, and presuming that upon survey A finds his present peg right (making, of course. B's and C's wrong), how does A stand with regard to the 4ft short in the roadway. Would he have to lose that 4ft or would the Government be content with the narrow road, seeing that it was their fault iv not objecting at the time they were put In?" [Tossibly the explanation of this matter is that the road is not supposed to be a full chain iv width. If it is, theu the peg on A's sectiou is most probably in the wrong place. If. however, 1? and C are encroaching on the public road, the mere fact I that the land they really do own has a land transfer title will not give them a right to maintain the encroachment. Of course, they may have a claim on the j insurance fund if the Registrar has purported to give them a title to part of the road. In any case, an encroachment by B and C could not, under any circumstances, j deprive A of any part of his property on the opposite side of the road.] PROXY writes:—"l start in business and fall, and am not able at present to meet my creditors. All debts were contracted by mc. Can my creditors touch any property possessed by my wife previous to our marriage, she having a life Interest In certain property?" [Not unless the wife has made herself responsible by guarantee or otherwise.] £ ACACIA DEAEBATA Writes:—"About six years ago I purchased a section of laud: along the boundary on one side of which some former owner had planted a number of silver wattles, which were very large, some of them over a foot iv diameter, 'when I purchased the property. The adjoining section was bought by my present neighbour eight or nine years ago. He told mc when 1 first came that he did not like wattles on the boundary, and although the trees were not overhanging or encroaching upon his land in any way. I cut • down the whole of them, rather than be disagreeable. His land at that time was covered with dense scrub.' which he afterwards cleared and burned. A crop of wattles, from seed off my trees, followed. I wish to know, am I Jiable, and can I be compelled to clear the wattles on his side as well as my own. Both of us have cleared the line (each on our own side), but he appears to think that now a second crop of young wattles have made their appearance. I should ♦ keep both sides clear"' [As the present owner cut down the trees soon after his purchase, the damage would apparently have been caused by his predecessor in title, and. therefore, he cannot be held responsible for the damage, nor be required to grub the wattles.] WF.P. writes: —"Would you kindly advise mc what to do in the following case: — My father is a storekeeper, and In a good position. I am working 0 hours a day for him, But he will give mc no wages or money whatever. I am 18 years old and wish to have a little money of my own. Can I claim any wages from him?" [W'F.P.'s father is making a very great mistake, which, I regret to say, is also a very common one. Unless W.F.P. Is working under an award of the Arbitration Court I am afraid he has no claim against his father for past wages. He need not, however, work another minute without pay. if his father will not pay him he may seek another employer, but. of course, he have to consider whether- that would ,fjf a wise change to make. My -own opinion is that W.F.P.: would be much better with his father, if the latter could be induced to treat him in. a common sense way.] H.L. writes: —"A verdict for five pounds Is given against my husband. If the bailiffs come can I stop them from entering my house, as I pay the rent from my own labour? My husband bS out of work, and has nothing belonging to him." [Yes, if the furniture In the house is H.lT.'s, it cannot be seized for her husband's' debt.] H.W.—The property may be sold 12 months ■after the date of the judgment for the payment of overdue rates. J.fi. writes: —"Mrs A, a widow, has a piece of ground, with- small cottage thereon, in her own name. She has a mortgage of £300 ou it. If B were to marry Mrs A, would B make himself liable for the - amount of mortgage (£350), and Interest thereon, or would the land, and -cottage and Mrs A. alone be liable?" [The husband would not become liable in any way. The liability would be precisely ! as it was before the marriage.] PARNELL writes; —"If a weekly tenant calls in a man to do repairs without i either consulting or notifying the owner' or his agent in any way, who is legally responsible for the cost of such repairs?" [The tenant alone is responsible, and the owner may refuse to pay.] ANXIOUS writes:—"Having a child staying with relations some distance away. I have written asking them to bring or send' the child here, in care of some friends whom I can ' rely upon. These friends have been to see the child, but the relations refuse to give tbe child up. What would you advise now?" [Anxious had better go himself for the child.] BTBCORDER CABLE cannot oblige his late employer to give him a "character." nor to divulge remarks concerning him that have been made to snch employer. Whether or not he has an action agaiust the employer for defamation depends on the circumstances, and especially upou the consequences to Recorder Cable of the words nsed. I have complied with the request In the latter S*rt of Recorder Cable's letter.")

WAIKATO could obtain a divorce on the desertion alone, so that most of the distressing details could be .left out. .No doubt the simple fact of such a divorce having been obtained would be published, but no details would be given. INQUIRER writes:—"Dear Sir,—Can I collect a debt contracted in Anckland by a person who was at that time on tbe s.s.Hiuemon, but is now in Melbourne? If so, what means should I take?" [Send particulars to a debt collector in Melbourne.]