LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2109, 28 March 1914, Page 14

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT.

FORTUNES OF A HUTT FARM. INTRICATE DEAL. Practically the whole day was occupied in the Supremo Court yesterday m hearing a case in which an Tipper Hutt farm, of 1935 acres, formed the centrepiece. The plaintiff was William Charles Alfred Dimock, and the defendants were Mary Ann Wilkins, of Upper Hutt, and tho Public Trustee. His Honour the Chief Justice was on "the Bench.

It appeared from tho proceedings that Mrs. Wilkins had -been owner of the property. In March, 1910, there were three mortgages on the land, one of £2900 to the Public Trustee, one to Dimock on which £360 was owing, and a third of £170 to Veitch and .Allan. In addition to these Mrs. Wilkins had other liabilities. Dimock had been about to exercise his powers under the mortgage, and it was thought that had he dono so, Mrs. Wilkins would have been left with nothing. Instead of his exercising those powers, however, Dimock and Mrs. Wilkins had entered into certain arrangements whereby she transferred the wholo property-to him for a consideration of £4100, including the total amount of all mortgagees, with interest, etc., and all the* liabilities. At the same time she got two leases back—one a house and tour acres (for the period of her life) which she was allowed to hold at a nominal rental, and, also; the rest, of tho property was leased to her for her lifetime at a rental consisting of the payment of certain interest charges; At that time the wholo property was valued at ovfcr £10,000. In August, 1910 (after Dimock had acquired it) a special Government valuation was maue, and the land was assessed as being worth £7899. About a year ago th* Public Trustee iv.is appointed manager cf Mrs. Wilkiris's estate under the Aged and Infirm Persons Act, 1912. Tho appointment was made on the ground that she was unable, through excessive dunking, to manage her affairs. The present proceedings were commenced bv Dimock and were for cancellation of the lease of the farm on the ground of ncnpayment of rent and breaches cf covenant. The Public Trustee countcrclaimed thatj_ in spite of the form of the transaction, the relationship between Dimock and Mrs. Wilkins was' that of mortgagee _ and mortgagor, and iliat Mrs. Wilkins was entitled to redeem her property on repayment to Dhncck of .the total amount owing co him. It .was also put forward in the counterclaim that,sat tho time'that the transfer of tho property was made, Mrs. Wilkins (by 'reason of excessivo drinking) was not in a fit state to manage her business, and that Dimock used bis position as mortgagee to influence hor co enter into tho transaction and sell her property to him at a considerable under-value.

In _ defeuco it was urged that Mrs. TVilkins had a solicitor acting for lier at tho time of the transaction, ancl that the p rice given by Dimock was a reasonable ono in view of the state of the property market at the time, and of tho benefits which she received fiorn tho leases. It was said, also, in defeuco that no influence had been used by Dimock, but that Mrs. Wilkins was independently represented by a solicitor, and was made thoroughly awaro of the nature of the transaction. , Mr. A. A. S. Menteath appeared for the plaintiff, and Messrs. J. \V. Macdonald and IT. 15. Kelly for tho defendants. Some evidence was heard, and tho case now stands adjourned till 9.30 this morning.

OCCULT CLAUSE. WILL OF A MOTUEKA FARMER. His Honour the Chief Justice, (Sir Robert Stout) gavo judgment in the Supreme Court yesterday in a case in which tho Court was asked to interpret a provision in tho will ,of tho late Charles Green, farmer, of Slotueka. This provision related to tho bequest of a farm to deceased's, son, Joseph Green, and one passage in tho will ran:— If my son Joseph Green dies Tinmarried, or, if -married, leaves a widow, but no legitimate issue, then I direct that the wholo of the land I have left to him . . . shall bo . sold, and tho money invested, tho interest accruing from which shall bopaid to his widow, so long as she lives, or as long as sho may remain a widow. At her death the whole of the money invested shall be divided amongst tlio children of my son Georgo Green in equal shares.

Joseph Green had asked the trustees to surrender to him tho title deeds of tho land, but this request had. been opposed, on the ground that, if Joseph Green died childless (ho has been married somo years, but has no child) tho farm wont to Georgo Green's children. It was contended on behalf of Joseph Green that the clause would havo operated if Joseph' Green had died during his father's lifetime, but that as the position stood, tho land became bis absolutely. : His Honour said that tho onus in the matter,was upon Joseph Green. Ho must snow that tho natural meaning of tho words was limited, and His Honour was of opinion that he (Joseph Green) had not discharged that onus, though, added His Honour, the case was on tho | border line. The Court, therefore, held that Joseph Green was not entitled to an absolute estate in . the land, but that ho held it subject to an executory deviso which only became oporaivc if ho left no children.,

MAORI FARMER. PROPOSED EXCHANGE STOPPED. The refusal of tho Ikaroa Maori Land Board to confirm aii exchange of lands mado by Teira Ngarara with Millicent Howell led to tho Court being asked recently to Bet aside the judgment of the board. Teira Ngarara was to get about five acres in Ngarara V/ost, which was said to be valuable only as a residential area, and was valued at about £1000. The land which he was piepared _ to_ ,part with was seventy acres, adjoining tho Paraparaumu railway station, and was close to tho fiveacro block. In tho course of his judgment yesterday. His Honour tho Chief Justico said: "This small area would bo useless to liim (Teira Ngarara) as a farmer. It was suggested that, it might do for-raising fruit, but tho board knew that tho Maoris have not hitherto been fruit-farmers, and £100 an acre for a fruit farm is a high price, considering the delay beforo a crop can bo got. The expenditure per acre to mako it a fruit farm would bo a risky business venture for a Maori. To ask a Maori to become a speculator-,'! town sections would bo absurd, and fo initiate the Maoris into land excliango transatcions which havo been so injurious to so many Europeans (as actions in recent years before this Court havo made tho Court acquainted with), would bo more absurd still. I, therefore. see no reason for setting' aside the judgment.of tho Board (the I'taroa Maori Land Board). Indeed, if tho board had confirmed tho transaction it would not, in my opinion, havo been doing its duty." The application was dismissed, with 1 £8 Bs. costs. j