THE COURTS.

Press, Volume LII, Issue 15707, 28 September 1916, Page 3

THE COURTS.

SUPREME COURT. RESERVED JUDGMENTS. Two reserved judgments -were delivered at the Supreme Court yesterday morning by his Honour Mr Justice Denniston. KNIGHT v. BADGER. In the case of Emma Knight (M r Howe) v. Edith Aldam Staplyton _ Badger, the original defendant was Wilfred Badger, after \rlio6o death liis widow> as administratrix, was joined ae defendant. In her statement of the plaintiff, after setting out the will of her father, Mark Dixon, his death, and the grant of administration with, the will annexed of his estate to tho defendant ou June 6th, 1393, and setting out certain alleged acts of omission and oommis6ion by the defendant, asked that the accounts filed by hini of his administration of the estate be referred to the Registrar of the Supreme Court, to certify what sum, if any, iva« due by the defendant, and that the defendant be ordered to pay such sum as might be found to be due by tho defendant to the cliildrcn of the testator.

After reviewing tho ease at some length, his Honour said that, in his opinion, the plaintiff had. shown no valid grounds for the relief she asked. Judgment would be for the defendant ■with costs on the lowest scale. AN APPEAL DISALLOWED. His Honour also delivered iudgpient in the case in which Robert Michael Cox and James Phillip Walsh appealed against their conviction in the Lower Court on charges of having kept certain premises iri Cathedral square as a common gaining house. Mr J. A. Cassidy appeared at the hearing for the appellants, and 3lr S. G. Raymond, K.C., for the respondent, Thomas Gib6on. . _ The appeal was dismissed, with. £7 ts 006tiS against each appellant.

IN BANCO. After delivering his reserved judgments, his Honour sat in Banco. UNAUDITED TRUST ACCOUNTS. Mr F. TV. Johnston appeared as counsel for the Canterbury District Law Society in the matter of a motion for a rule nisi, directing that Robert Daniel Mclver, solicitor, of Kaikoura, should appear before the Court to show cause why lie should not bo struck eft' the roll of solicitors of the Court, or suspended from practice as solicitor for such time as the Court might determine, on the ground that ho had wilfully failed to comply with the regulations under the Law Practitioners' Amendment Act, 191?, in that ho had failed to liavc an annual audit of his trust accounts. Mr Johnston said that he did not press to have tho rale made .absolute, as Mclver had rectified his failure to have his accounts audited. Tho Law Society would be satisfied with an order directing Mc-Ivcr to pay the costs. His Honour remarked that there had evidently been a mixing of private and trust accounts, which was a very dangerous thing indeed. There had been non-compliance with the law in two instances. If he did not make tho order, it did not follow that ho would not ,act differently in future cases of such a nature. No order would be mado as to making the rule absolute, but Mclver would be ordered to pay tho Law Society's costs, the amount to be agreed upon with tho Law Society.

MAGISTRATE'S ACTION CONTESTED. An appeal against the decision of a Magistrate, at Greymouth was ma-do bv William Clough. for whom Sir Cassidy appeared, Mr S. G. Raymond, K.C., .appearing to oppose the tionMr Cassidy, in outlining the ca6e, said that on February 3rd, 1916, his client. was found in possession of a, quantity _of opium in a form suitable for'smoking. He was arrested and charged on two informations. The first was laid under the Opium Act, 1898, and charged Clough with being in possession of opium in a form suitable for smoking. He pleaded guilty and the Magistrate convicted and discharged Mm. He was then charged under the Customs Act, 1913, ' with having been in possession of certain prohibited imports, namely, opium. When the Magistrate callcd on him to plead, ho objected to doing so on tho grounds that, as the informations were laid on the same facts, he had already beo n tried, convicted, and discharged. The Magistrate again convicted him, this time fining, him £100. Clough appealed against this decision, and Mr Justice Sim, who heard tho appeal, set tho second conviction aside and directed tho Magistrate to amend his first decision, which he did by fining Clough £00, with the alternative of three months' imprisonment, which he was now serving. Mr Cassidy concluded that he was now asking for a writ of prohibition against the Magistrate's altering liis first judgment from a conviction and discharge to a fine of £50, asserting tliat ho had no power to do so. Mr Raymond contended that the Magistrate did not mukn a complete adjudication ;n the first instance, but lield over the essential part of his !c Punishment, until lie had heard tho second case. 110 was, ■h • ", a .. vmc ? contended, perfectlv uj" ? in doing so, and lie had fulfilled his obligations bv inflicting the punishment later. After hearing the somewhat legal argument, his Honour reserved Ins decision.

magisterial. (Before Messrs John Jaraiejon and T. B. Pike. J.P.'s.) DISMISSED. Mr Thomas appeared for John Michael Gearschawski, and applied for leave to movo for the rescinding cf a prohibition order granted by t-Ec presiding Justices on September Bth. The Bench dismissed the application. (Before Mr T. A. B. Bailey, S.M.) DRUNKENNESS. * A first offender was convicted and discharged, and had a prohibition order issued against him on the police stating that he was the father of ten children. ALLEGED THEFT. August. Walker, a young man, charged with stealing a bicycle at New Brighton, was remanded till Monday, October 2nd. Bail was allowed. LYTTELTON. (Before Mr W. C. Geary, J.P.) drunkenness' A first offender was eonvictcd and. discharged. ■> BY-LAW CASE. Sydney Forscutt. on a charge of having thrown some glass in Norwich quay on Friday last, was convicted, and ordered to pay costs. VARIOUS OFFENCES. (nuss ASSO :tATIOV telegram.) OTAKI, September 37. At the Otaki Police Court to-day John McGregor and Charley Packer, described by Detective Andrews as "racecourse parasites,'' were sentenced to throe, months and and ono month's imprisonment respectively. James Stines, for using obscene language. was fined £0, in default, ono month's imprisonment. George White, alias Williams, on a. charge of gambling on a train, was finod £10, in default, two months' imprisonment.