SUPREME COURT.-Friday. CIVIL JURISDICTION. [Before his Honor Sir G. A. Arney, Chief Justice, and a Common Jury.]

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXVII, Issue 4408, 30 September 1871, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.-Friday. CIVIL JURISDICTION. [Before his Honor Sir G. A. Arney, Chief Justice, and a Common Jury.]

The Court resumed sittmg.tty« morning at 10 o'clock. ■• |Sauerbiek v. Dilwobth. — Messrs. MacJCormick end Hesketh for complainant, and Mr. W. L. Rees for the defence. ' This cause . had been adjourned from the previous evening. — rMr.' W. L. Rees, having addressed the jury for the defence, called the defendant Dilwprth, who stated that ho resided near Aypk- 1 land, and was acquainted with Mr. Riehjnond. He had' met that' gentleman, who' spoke to him with respect to a letter he Had received from plaintiff. 1 ' Mr. .Biohmpnd, asked witness what he was going to do in the matter. Witness replied that'.he'di'd not know, and that Mr. Richmond had beitef see his' solicitor,' Mr. Whitaker. .He did not nay ■ he would not "comply "with. tW> request <sontained in the letter sent him by plaintiff, nor did he say he would defend the suit., Witness was aware ho was speaking to an opposing lawyer, and consequently 1 referred him to his solicitor. He had lent £ 1, 000 upon mortgage signed by Uox as Sauerbietfa attorney. Cox produced all the deeds which vrdre necessary. Did not suspect there ttu anything wrong, as Mr. Brookfield had previously done busineas for him which wWs always right enough. Cox paid to witnsss £31 sa. as One quarter's interest. Cox left the colony long" since. It, was on the March, following his paying the quarter's interest. Witness con* sidered hejwas dealing with Mr. Brookneld, who had done a great deal «f business for him. This was before .the firm became Brookfield and Cox, although he might have had, and believed 'he'did have, 6ne transaction with Brookfield after Cox had joined the firm. Witness drew a cheque for the amount and iv the counterpart he had written the words " Sauerbier, per Brookfield and Cox, £1,000." He was perfectly aware h« wai paying the money to Sauerbier through Brookfield and Cox. . He, gave the cheque $o Cox. Fe believed that Sauerbier had received £500 out of the £1,000. He' considered that at least £500 should be paid before he was asked to give up the deed of mortgage. He was not on terms' of ■ friendship *with Mr. Richmond, bo that when i;hat gentlemen spoke to him ho looked upon the matter as a question of law, and one he was quite incapable of dealing with. He never asked Brookfield and Cox— neither one nor the other — to invest money for him. it was he who had been aaked whether he had got any money to lend. If he had had to ask any one to invertnioney for him it would have been Messrs. Whitaker and Russell.'— James Kelly, chief clerk in the Registrar's office, produced power of attorney from Sauerbierto Cox. —An accountant from the bank provod a draft for £500 had been drawn by Cox in favour of Sauerbier, but this had been sworn by the plaintiff as being altogether for another pmpose than a payment pn .account of the £I,QOO mortgage. — Plaintiff's counsel having addressed the jury, his Honor summed up, and in a short time the jury returned into Court with a verdict for the plaintiff on all the issues. Marshall v. the Italian Goldmining Company.— Mr. Hesketh for the plaintiff, and Mr. W. L. Rees for the defence. A jury having been empanelled, his Honor, in accordance with a wish expressed by the jury, allowed the hearing in this action to staud over until Tuesday week, 10th pvoximo, in order to allow for the special jury cases to be concluded. — The Court was then adjourned until Monday next at 10 o'clock.