THE COURTS.

Press, Volume LIX, Issue 17938, 5 December 1923, Page 6

THE COURTS.

SUPREME COURT.

(Before his Honour, Mr Justice Adams..l COMPANY MANAGER'S CLAIM. By consent of counsel, an order was made at the Supreme Court' yesterday that the accounts of Thomas WaddeU, Sons and Co., Ltd. (in liquidation) ehould be taken before the Registrar and an accountant. Thomas "Wadoell, iron founder (Mr-C. S. Th v omas), c'.aimcd. from Thomas Waddell, Sons and Co., Lt-d. (Mr A. T. Murphy), the sum of £IOB4 9s 2d and interest from' April 27th, 1923, Tvlien the company went into liquidation, to' date of judgment. Plaintiff alleged' that he lnid deposited at . various limes sums of money with the company, 'the total • being .£3084 9s : 2d." Tho company had paid him £'2ooo in reduction of the debt, but refused to pay the , balance, alleging contra for moneys paid and goods ' supplited. In a counter-claim the company asked that the accounts ishould be taken subject to certain limitations. The question of'costs wafl reserved. . PROVISION UNDER WILL. More evidence and legal argument »'er® heard in the case in which Annie Louisa Armstrong, spivstor, 'of Southbridge (Mr E. \V. White), '.made application for further provision under , the will of her mother, Eliza Armstrong. Tlic nominal defendant was her brother, Robert George Armstrong, farm labourer, of- Southbridge (-Mr J. H. Upham). His Honour reeei'Vcd his decision. MAGISTERIAL.

TUESDAY. ' (Before Mr Wvvern Wilson, S.M.; ALLEGED .ROBBERY AND VIOLENCE. Herbert John Newton .(Mr Livingstone) appeared charged -with robbing Norman Thompson of a watch with gold chain and a sovereign case, valued at £l2, on December Ist ■, and also with using persona', violence in com. ruitting the act. On the application of the Police the accused was re:nandcd' to appear to-day. POLICEMAN INJURED. John Michael Gearsk&wski (Mr R. Twyneham) appeared charged with obstructing a constable in the execution of his duty; using insulting language; . insulting 1 a constable, and committing mischief. Senior-Sergeant P., Lewin stated that th« accused had insulted and obstructed- a mounted constable in the execution of his duty to such an extent that the constable had two ribs .fractured and' was suffering from other injuries as a result of the accused's action On the application of the Police the accused wa3 remanded for a fortnight. Hail *vas allowed at self £350 and .two sureties of £lso' each. "SELF DEFENCE." Gertrude Mary Constable (Mr C. S. Thomas) ' proceeded against her ' huaband, Lindus Victor Constable (Mr R. Twyneham) for separation and maintenance ordera, on the. ground ol: desertion. Gertrude il.ary Constable eaid that they had been married since 1916, and their married iife'had been smooth right up t .11 htr husband had started Work on the Lyttelton wharf. About nine months ago he had j started working in a- brewery, and since then he ha been drinking heavily. He often came home late at night and in the early hours of the morning, and had • abused her and ill-treated her, When ho was not under the influence of liquor he was not so bad, but as soon os he was drunk he used vile language and 'he behaved like an animal. §he udmitted to Mr Twyneham that she had struck her husband with a poker, a mop, and a- broom, and she had once stopped one of his rusheß with a rake. She also admitted that j she had recently given him two black eyes>. On one occasion he threatened her life.

Mr Twyneham: You're not afraid of liim are' you?— No. I'm afraid of 110 roan!' It has been a pretty, good competition between you. hasn't it'?— Yes, but I've only hit him in self defence. , Mr Thomas suggested that the case should be withdrawn, aB there had been shown no evidence of , desertion. Mr Twyneham agreed, and his Worship re-marked-that tHe case should never have been brought into Court."FUGITIVE FROM JUSTICE. Maty Annie Murray (Mr Hitchings) proceeded again.it her liusband, J oh'n • OstoaJd Murray (Mr -K- Twyneham) for failure to comply with the terms of a maintenance order. Mr Hitchings said that in April, 19(M, defendant and his wife separated and a maintenance order was made. Up to December of the same, year ,he* had 'been before the Court on several occasions for failing to prov.de her with maintenance. On one occasion defendant was allowed a week to pay back maintenance, • in. default , of six months' imprisonment, and in. that week lie' disappeared, 'fhat was nineteen yeats ago. Murray had deliberately ' left his wife and three infant children destitute. He had gone to Australia' With another woman, and he was the father of six children living in that country. From information received from the Police in Australia, lie gathered that Murray • had left the woman and si£ children there almost destitute. Ever snice 1913 the defendant had been receiving 'an annuity of £IOB from the estate of his mother, but 'he 'had never paid a: penny towards the maintenance of his wife. The defendant was £l-102 in arrears on the order. If it was not in consideration of tlife mother and children . in Australia, hi would, have no hesitation in asking his Wor'ship to pass a term of' imprisonment, but as it was he would ask for the cast to be dismissed. Mr Twyneham said that in the main the statements made by Mr Hitching were correct. The accused had remained in hiding in New Zealand for some time, and then, 1 as a fugitive of justice, \he had cljosen the foolish course and gone to Australia. There lie had lived with another woman and .was the father of her six 'cnildren. He thought that some arrangement could be rnnde to provide for the wife by arrnnginc for her to receive the annuity of £108: Mr Hitchings said the only thing they could do'was to t-nke' him on trust. , The case was dismissed. . MAKRIKD SIX WEEKS. Evelyn Carmielwel (Mr K. Twyneham) proceeded against lier husbaiid, Keith Carmichael (Mr J. ii. Batchelbr) lor separation and maintenance orders on the grounds of desertion. Eveiyn C'armichael stated that her husband had lelt her suddenly in the street and she had not heard of'him until he had been arrested. They had been married only six weeks. . The. Magistrate refuse*! to make an order on the grounds that she had not given her husband a fair chance to maintain her. When lie had left her he had . gohe into the country and had honestly tried to get money with which to maintain her. The case was dismissed. • : MAINTENANCE. Mary Jane Jbliery vivir U. ib. -Thomas) proceeded against iler husband, Henry Arthur ■htiery {alr W'. J. Hunter) for separation and maintenance orders on the grounds oi wiflul laiiuri to. maintain. Mr Thomas said that Mrs Ellery seemed to be a long-suitering woman. Previous ! to tne Timaru show tne deiendant had left his Wile at homo four or live nights a week. On tHe day oi "the aixow they both, travelled in the train to Timaru, but her husband had left her and sat with another woman. Later he told her that he was tired of her and she had better leave. Mary Jane Ellery said she had left at her husband's request and had lived with her sisters, in Timaru."* Before she left she had received £7 from her husband and he had promised to pay her £1 per week. ' Mr- Thomas submitted that as the £1 per week had not' been paid the defendant • had failed to maintain. Mr Hunter objected, and said that the £1 had not yet run out. ■ < His Worship said-he could not make & eeparation order on the evidence, and' dismissed the application. '

IN OTHER PLACES. AN APPEAL DISMISSED. DUNEDLN, December, i, At the Supreme Court, Mr Juetice Sim gave judgment tins morning m an appeal' of tiio Louimonwealth unci Dominion .Line against the decision of the Magistrate, who gave judgment tor Kattray and Son in a caio in which the latter claimed against the shipping company in respect to the damage of 300 cases of dates shipped from liondon in the steamer Port Caroline. The jydge held that - the Magistrate was justified • in finding that the dates were in good order and condition when shipped and had been damaged aboard the etcamer by water from some external source. The appeal was dismissed. '