THE MERRILANDS CASE.

Auckland Star, Volume LV, Issue 306, 26 December 1924, Page 11

THE MERRILANDS CASE.

NO KNOWLKDCK OF SHORTAGES. In (he Merrilands Kstate case, in which Surfdale Kstates (Messrs. Kinky and Anderson) sued John l'atcrson, .lames I'atersoti. and Helen I'aterson (Mr. Ostler and Mr. MeVeagh) for the sum of £332S for commission on the sale of certain sections. Arthur Hubert Hughes, land agent, admitted under cross examination" that be still remained in the employment of Surfdale, Ltd., despite apparent irregularities noticed by him. During the time he was iv their employ—a period of eight months—he drew '£1200. Witness had come over from Australia on the invitation of Langton, the then assistant manager of Surfdale, Ltd. During the cross-examination, referring to a statement made by Hughes ancnt the procedure allegedly followed by Dunne when opening letters containing money, Mr. Justice Reed said he paid very "little attention to the evidence of ex-employees against those who had formerly employed them. John Paterson, one of the defendants, slated under cross-examination that he knew of no misappropriation by Dunne. He knew of no shortages. Witness did not recall, any letters from any of the present purchasers showing that Dunne had not accounted for any of the instalments. Decision wns reserved.