CHRISTCHURCH.

Press, Volume L, Issue 8594, 22 September 1893, Page 3

CHRISTCHURCH.

TnrnsDAY, September 21. /Before B. H. Wood and W. Williams, E«q»., J.P.'e) DsiwKESNEsa — A first offender, for irrokeunees, pleaded guilty, and was fined fii'or 24 hour* , imprisonment. Looking for a Bed. —William Dawaon, old man, who looked iieicely at Ilia centers, excitedly pleaded "Not guilty" to charge of drunkenness. He had been looking for * bed, be said, aud happening to walk into the police station to seek some advice they "collared" him. Detective Marsack and Chief Detective O'Conuor ■were that the man was not fit to be at Urge in the condition lie was in, and they b»d him 'ocked up. Jbined ss, or twentylour hoar/i. (Uofore R. Bcet'.iam, Esq., R.M.) Civil Casks. —In Malcolm aud Roach v j> KilF- llriok £ ? 183 6d " J" 1^1 " 6 " 6 went for the plaintiffs by default, with coats. C Kodfern v V. .Set-lan, claim £2 12a 6d _ fc judgment summons. Defendant admitted the debt, and said he had no means #f paying. As plaintiff was unable to prove ttiaV defendant had, no order was made. Official Assignee (in the estate of James Levett) v Ctiristcluirch Mercantile Finauce r» claim £15 4s 7d, for overpaid cornmiarion Mr Bruges appeared for the plaiutifl', ud Mr Byrne lor deiwudant Company. Mr Brvgea sail the facts of the cave were that James Levett had i>ecn owner of a farm at I Kiiliochy. It va-» mortgaged to the Christ- j church J&tnldiug (Society, and it was also mortgaged to the defendant Company. g aß iequently it went into bankruptcy. Theo the property waa sold by the | defendant Company, and it realised a price ! iufficieut to pay all duos to the defeadaat Company, and something beyond, j Ihe balance wax iiauded o\ er to the Official : Ateiff&ee. The question before the Court. «M as t* the amount properly claimable by the defendant as commission for the auctioneer who sold. Tne property realised about £1400 or £1500, and the defendant contended that he was entitled to corumisnon on the full amount of the purchase money. The plaintio, on the other hand, contended that the auctioneer was only entitled to payment on the equity of redemption, and the action was taken to recover £15 4s 7d, the excess of commission. The property bt ought £583 above the flrat mortgage Mr Beetham—The ■question seems to be that the whole had to bo sold to get what was obtained. Mr ' Ujrue—That is bo. Mr Bruges theu called | 0. L Greenwood, Official Assignee iv the bankruptcy of Janieu Levatt's estate, who | gave evidence which supported the facts ) ttatsA by counsel. Witness agreed with I Mr RuiwH for defeudaut urediior that it .' would be the beat way to deal with the j eaUteto sell it, but he did not remember any arrangement being made for payment of Auctioneer's commission. After the eal« witness received £40419s 9d on the utreugth of the account. Witness concluded that the first mortgage was paid off. In crosi- examination, he said he probably gave instructions for the sale of the chattels included in the account ealee. Witness's attention was drawn to the matter when Air Levett, after paying 20s in the £, and obtaining his discharge, went through the accounts. J. H. ISeager, Secretary to the Christchurch Building Society, stated that the mortgage for £90U ■till existed, though the property had according to certificate of title been sold to Mrs Mary Moihead. Cross-examined: The mortgage was due in two instalments of £400 on 17th August, '94, and £500 4.7 th August, 1897. A. Appleby, Clerk to Mr Charles Ciark, stated that the custom in such sales M the one in question, would be to obtain io writing the commission to be charged. Some further evidence was taken, and the plaintiffs case closed. For the defence Albert Whittaker, accountant for the Mercantile Finance Company, str.ted that the account was settled aud closed according to the statement. Mr Byrne submitted that plaintiff should be nonsuited on the points that plaintiff was splitting his demands, and that a mortgagor could not maintain at common law an action against Itis mortgagee in if»p«cx of a wrongful or oppressive sale. remedy was an action for k/Itmt. Mr Bruges replied, after which ie reserved his decision. In T. o»pe3 v Funston, claim £17 10s 6d, after hearing the evidence, judgment was reserved till the case of Burt v Funston, claim £9 163 3d, had been heard. After taking a portion of the evidence, the case woe adlournod till next day. Mr Caygill appeared lor the plaintiff*, Mr Byrne* for the defendants.