MAGISTRATE'S. COURT.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 933, 28 September 1910, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S. COURT.

:■;. v §■ "■ POLI,C t! CAS £.£]{. a : ?-■■ ' 'Frank' I Wilson was 'charged-'with'that, on" September 24 at .Wellington, Ke did commit theft,of. a: tin.,of naphtha .value 65.-Bd., the property -of'George'-Pinnock. Mr. •■•;y-.'-. E. { Meredith,-, who ■; appeared •' for accused, asked for: avreuianu; till September, 28.; : ,The application was-grarited,-■b'ail ""Being 'allowedin '.£6 and one surety' p£';J5.C;-\-.- :^;- ■';>.•: ~".'■''.••"■.•.' . '.;;■".'.-. .•,'"■'j ':;Xi°iet ! : - Campbell ■'.■■: was "with'' drunkness.and.with procuring liquor"during the .'currency-- of a/prohibition'''.order?. '.For'' the first v 'offence'■• she 'was' convicted' and 'discharged and'.for' the'.second ; she ■wa.i; fined 405.,;. in.'"default. 14 days' 'ithpf iV "inment;;' :','.; .;.■■■- >,'..., .-•/■.. • ■ - ;(.'■ : - V! , .:. .Thomas 'Chambers. 'Leslie '■■■ M'Gregor pleaded guilty;'to. 7a : charge .of. drunken-, ness and .to. a. second change of procur-ing:-liquor during .tho currency of a prohibition order..; 'This was the second ibreach .of -.-tho: order.arid, his "Worship reminded accused that,he was liable .to. b6.;seht.to-Pakatoa Island.for..one.year.. ;On.the first'charge,he ;was..cbnvicted'and; discharged; andfor the second-offencelne ',vas.; fined';iOs.,-. with ,;th6.:alternativo;'of. •M;.days''. imprisonment...''; V/" !,•"•.-" ".■■■' ';.-Frederick Hunt,' on.a.charge of-drunk-enness, was.fined; lOsv^ih;default:4B hours' imprisonment.; Two . first-offending." inebriates •were.; jfiried'i:ss;, : in. default. 24 hours' -imprisonment. .-', '-'•• '.;. '■ : '■~,.; • ~ - :;i: ; ';.:?-;:.clviL: B UsiNESS;; ;^:\^^! ':•:>. (B^fqre^ ; ■ A" DEAJjVIEFT .INviOBSCUEITY/ .';. ''.; Bescryed', decision was'delivered'at the Magistrate's':Court, yesterday' morning in the.'case.ih which Herbert James; Baker sued Annie'Gledhill •.for. .£65 'commission alleged' to 'be' dueVby..'defendant to; one 'Luke.'M'Gann onV.an' exchange ;of 'cerr'. tain'properties, the; amount; having, been' subsequentlyassigned' to plaintiff.;-' Lade'-, 1 Uivering.iudgment- his worship ;said:— "The plaintiff,' as- assignee of; : Luke M'Gann! claimed -.£65 as commission :earn,ed by.M'Gann 'on exchange ofproperties ; between i the; defendant and one vVood/ The defendant' is the sister■, of one' : Wv;"G. Soiner.ville, ;a solicitor,, whoseoperations'have :recently. afforded much,. occupation to courts:; of law.-Mr., Somerville gave evidence 'in. this.case.;'He says.he-authorised M'Gann to 'sell certain.properties,' which .the defendant did not own, but in. which she had i.uncertain/ interests.. Whether Mrs.: Gledhill was merely a, dummy in: whose rUme Somerville ■ manipulated titles and, dealings, ■ or'whether she. was.,a ; partner in, the .transactions'was,.not made clear, but itwas'.-at;, least .made plain that 1 she allowed , ; h'er brother to act in her -name as her. agent,. and: that she accepted'(titles,; and executed -transfers: of the properties handled by -her brother. : "On.May" 12,, 1910, Somerville writes to the plaintiff as follows :;- Ills.'. Gledhill has given an acknowledgment of your, .order; and on due comDletion of the exchange., she .is .willing to ,pay the com- ' mission, £50, to you, subject to, your indemnifying' her against claims by .Messrs. M'Gann and, Aubrey.'; It is not disputed that. at .this'. time .' Somerville was' acting' : as.: Mrs. -Gledhill's : alter- ego.' '.:' -\ ■ ."It is 'admitted' that'M'Gann-negotiat-ed the. exchange and that the; terms first arrived■-.- at ■', were ■', altered by' Somerville or with his consent.' V -'';.' •"'-■'' "There is a good'deal'in the case'which< is. left in obscurity,' but; I have been ableto arrive'.'at the conclusion' set forth.. I think the plaintiff has proved his case/' Judgment was accordingly given for plaintiff' for' the .amount •claimed,■ ,£65, with costs'totalling £9 12s:- ; 6d."'-" ■ r- :-.-,. . Security for leave to appeal was fixed 'at 1 .£lO. Mr. -A.' Fair was 'for :plaintiff■ and Mr.;o. Beere was for defendant. ".. UNDEFENDED. CASES.' ... ,;...' ■ Judgment by'default was given '. for plaintiff" in .the following undefended cases:—John' Norton ..v.'li. P. Gill,, -645; ;costs £2 155.; Wellington Harbour Board. v.'.W. Wilson, ',£l4 lis., Bd., costs £1 12s.' Gd.; Hall, as assignee for A., L. Williams and' Co., v. Howard'C. Baker, ,£3 as. 3d., costs lls.j'Dwan Bros, v. Harold. Lockhead, ,£2O 195.. Gd., costs £1 14s,;.Bulkley and Didsbiiry v. Bertha Fox, £3 18s., costs 55.; Singer : Sewing' Machine Company v. Mabel Fitzpatrick,' costs. 125.; Herbert. Hill, Ltd. v. James Watson, £5 125., costs ■. £1 Us. 6d.; Stew, art Timber, Glass, and ' Hardware . Co., Ltd. v.. Albert' James, XI lis.'3d.,, costs ss;; Cadbury Bros., Ltd, v. , Eachael Peattie.. .£1 2s;. 7d., costs 55.; -Welling-; ton United Furniture Trade Industrial Union of-'Workers v. John William Ent--wistle, £2 195., costs 10s. j Daniel Moore Brooks v. William Henry Hargreaves, £3, costs 10s.; Bates and Lees v. Louis .Berlyn.'iM,' costs 10s.; Charles W. Martin v. Sarah Ann Bird, ,£32 IBs. Id., costs .■£2; .Ms;', ■-~ ■ :.' ' ...' ■. -_.;. -.-'. .' - ■ JUDGMENT SUMMONS. ' ;No .order-. was made ;.in tho judgment summons-case.of Wynfdrd O. Beere v. -Mrs.-L. Q'Connor, a olaim for 6d-