THE COURTS.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 19940, 29 May 1930, Page 6

THE COURTS.

SUPREME COURT

WEDNESDAY. {Before his Honour Mr Justice Adams.; PROVISION UNDER WILL. fceece Frederick Smith, of Mcthven, farmer, applied under the pro visits of the Inn.Hy Protection Act (or an order to uece.erate pa; - ment of his share in the cstute cf his to.o father, Albert Frederick Smith. . lieecu Frederick Smith was the plaintiff in the case. Defendants wore: The Pubi.e Trustee, bb executor and trustee. Gertrude Harriet Smith, of Chrislchuiyh, the w.dow; Ileta Gertrude Smith ..u M, l d , red .Smith, Jocelyn Bertha Smith, Murray Muliin Smith, and Thelma Minnie McLachlan, wife of Archibald Albany McLachlan, of Christchurch,. solicitor, all beins children of A. F. smith; Gwenytli Mar?arct McLachlan, .John Murray MeLaclilan, and Robert Neil McLachlan and Marton Frederick Smith, all grandchildren ot A. 1. Smith. , , ,„„ „ . „ Mr A. A. McLachlan anncaml for Ree,;e F. Srrelh, Mr R. A. Outhbert tor the Public Trustee, us representative of the grandchildren born and unborn, Mr K. M. Gresson for the widow, and Mr M. J. Gresson for the applicant's brothers and sisters. Mr AfcLachlau said that the estate was valued at approximately £50,000. TJia beneficiaries were the testator's widow, a son aged 20 who was the plaintiff, another sou aged 19, four daughters, and four grandchildren. To the widow testator left £2OO absolutely and an annuity of £IOOO in the event of lha estate producing that amount of income. The average income from the estate during the past two years was £2OOO a year, but thin year, owing to the slump in wool prices, it was expected that the income would bo £IBOO or .£I9OO only. The will providfd for all the children, and was just and g#neroua to the baneticiaries. The ease arose from peculiar circumstances that happened before the testator died and after the will was made. Those circumstance* were relied upon in the application. During the testator's life £3OOO was spent on a farm for the applicant at Methvon. The applicant was now £IOOO in arrears in instalments on the mortgage on the property. Today the applicant was much worse off than any of tho other beneficiaries. jlr Outhbert said that the aßsete amounted to £57,920 and the liabilities to £11.300, leaving a balance of £46,200. Allowing for the sum represented by the widow's annuity, there remained £34,547, of which the applicant's share amounted to £5783. He had already had £3OOO. and the Public Trustee asked that the realty should not be sold and for ieave to carry on the farming operations of the estate. The income had been a little over £2OOO a year since the testator's death. A sum of £4OO a year was being spent on the education of the two younger daughtert. Counsel consented to the application, and his Honour said that he would make an order in a form to be submitted by counsel. A SMALL ESTATK.

Elsie Rosa, wife of Arthur Marttodslc Boss, of Christchurch. City Council employee applied under the Family Protection Act for further provision from the estate of her father, Henry Gibbs, late of Halswell, retired farmer. , The defendants were: May Frances BrightwoJ), Mvrtlo Henrietta Victoria Gibbs, Alice Maud Eder, Charles Gibbs, Minnie Wright, Rosettu Hayes, Frank Gibbs, Benjamin William Gibbs, Arthur Gibbs, Nelho \on Wogaa, and Harley Gibbs. all children of too teetator; Elisabeth Gibbs, widow of the testator; and the Public Trustee as executor and trustee of tho will of Henry Gibbs. Mr C. S. Thomas appeared for tho plaintiff, Mr R. A. Cuthbert for the Public Trustee, Mr K. G. Archer for May F. Bnghtwell and Mvrtlo H. V. Gibbs, and Mr M. J. Gresson for the remaining defendants. Mr Thomas said that the net balance Of the estate was approximately £4200. t Umtiff was entitled to n one-ninth share of tins. She was in poor henltli and needed a holiday to get back her strength for an operation. After tho operation, some time would he required for her to convalesce, bhe would be unable to attend to her domestic <lu'.i«s for nbout a year. Her husband earned Only £i 8s a week. Mr Thomas (suggested iloO as an adequate (mm for the purpose. Mr Gresson said that if plaintiff was entitled, then her three sisters, (or whom no claim was made, were equally entitled to something oxtra. The truth was that it was n small estate and there was not enough !o go round. All the children of the deceased with the exception of plaintiff woro »("««" that their father had done his best to bo lair to all of them. ~.,,. „„.. The application was refused, without cost*.

MAGISTERIAL. WEDNESDAY. (.Before Mr H. P. Lawry, S.H.I CASE DISMISSED. A charge against James Gibson, of operating an unlicensed wireless sot, was dismissed, tho .Magistrate holding thai it had not been proved that the act was capable of >eoeiving 6ignalß ' TRADING AFTER HOURS. William J. Deans was charged with Boiling ■smoking materials after hours and with stocking smoking materials without notifying an inspector *■*-,*. Accused pleaded guilty and was fined lea and costs on each charge. STOLE AN OVERCOAT. That ho atolo an overcoat, valued at £i, the property of James Bushridgo, was the charge brought against Cmhbert turns (Mr K i?. Bowie), who pleaded [rui jtv - Senior-Sergeant J. J. O'Or-xjy taid that on May 261 h accused went to tho Arcadia boarding-house with a friend, had lea thoie, and later went upstairs, wharo he apparently consumed an amount of liquor. When he went to leave tho house it was raining, and he took tho overcoat in question from amongst others on the hail-stand. He end that he meant to return it, but did not do no. liis excuai being that he had no means «I finding, out to whom it belonged. But m the brcaet-pockct of the coat was a wallet, which contained the owner's name and address. Accused had ono previous conviction against him. Mr Bowie said that his client wa* under the influence of liquor when he took the coat, and had meant to return it. but for some reason failed to do so. Drink had always been his troublo, and accounted for hie previous conviction, which took . place when be was a youth. Remarking that the case was not an ordinary one, Mr Law'ry convicted accused Mid ordered him to come up for sentence within twelve months if ordered to do s6, this being conditional upon his taking out a prohibition crder.

RANGIORA. (Before Mr E. D. Monley, 8.41.) A Children's Court was held before taking ordinary business. A boy charged with theft was admonished and discharged. In n case brought by the Health Inspector against Alice Murtitt, Mr Kippenberger, who appeared for the inspector, asked that the case be withdrawn, as the work had been attended to. Judgment was given for coßte, £2 10s. Judgment for plaintiffs by default Was given in the following cases:—Hor roll's Garage v. Ei B. Watson, £3 10s 10d, costs £1 7s 6d; J. StcMillan v. M. Te ftangi, £3 Us 4d, costs £1 7s 6d; same v. H. Pohio, £2 Is sd, costs £1 2s 6d. In a claim for posession of a tenement by li. P. Devlin, David McClure, who, was in arrears of rent to the oxtont of £49 10s, was ordered to give up possession of the promises by Juno 12th.