SUPREME COURT. CIVIL SITTINGS.

Evening Post, Volume XVII, Issue 397, 18 April 1879, Page 2

SUPREME COURT. CIVIL SITTINGS.

This Day. (Before his Honor Mr. Justice Richmond.) TBAV&BS AND ANOTHER T. HADFIBI-D. Mr. Travers appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Ollivier and Mr. Lewis for the defendant. This was an action brought by the plaintiffe to compel the defendant to complete a contract into which he had enter- d. It appeared tbat the plaintiffs, Messrs. W. T. L. Travers and R. • J. Duncan were trustees of the estate of the late James Giiligan. Mr. Gillfgan wss owner of 818 acres of land at Tawera, and some time before his death he agreed to sell this land to the defendant, Joseph Hadfield, for the sum of £13,000, £8000 of which was to remain o« mortgage. This agreement was reduced to writing, but when the time came for the completion of the contract the defendant declined to perform his part of it. Tbe plaintiffs now sought to compel him "to carry out the agreement originally entered, in to. The objection raised by the defendant was that the abstract of title was not given at the time specified in the written agreement. Tha only point which the jury were required to decide was the date upon which the title was handed over. They found that it was delivered on a certain data not named in the agreement, and the case will now have to come btfore the

.fudge sitting in Banco, when the legal points will be argued. HOtJGHTON V. MOODY. This was an action brought by the plaintiff to recover damages from tho defendant for a breach of contract with regard to tha insurance of certain premises. Mr. Ollivier appeared ior the plaintiff, and Mr. Tfafers or the defendant. - • -„ The plaintiff's casa was boing opened when wo went to press. THE "CONSPIRACY" AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT. " ~ *"* COLONEL WHITMORE IN' REPLY. TO TUB BDITOK OP THE &VBHIIfO POSTJ Sir — Mr. Waterhouse's letter to you oa the - telegram business did not at first appear to ' require Hay reply frttu me. 1 1 r*vo en incomplete and rather garbled account of the affair, and, contained rather violent expressions. But strong language does not create a strong* aasdj i s ou the contrary, it is in weak ones that one hoars of tho plaintiffs attorney coating m f<Jf ' " abuse. Mr. Waternouse, I think, has' substantiated nothing, except tha.t;he Is liable to ,« n unreasonable attacks of temper, and Exceedingly anxious to. force h^nis^if' boffcro Ibj > ; .public. " *-' But I see that tho story, from his manner of telling it, has been misunderstood, and I have before me an article. gravely accusing me of using my official position to intercept a telegram addressed to somebody else, and of disclosiug its contents to my colleagues.. This 6UNWaterhouses Waterhouse, and compels me to put forward tho facts oi the case as far as I can do so. The telegram I opened was clearly addreased to' mi, clearly intended for tub,, and came to me in ordinary course like any other telegram. The clerical error to which Mr. .Mr. ,Wiiterhouse refers occurred in another teleßrim. aitogeilleh-) which was delivered in Christchurch, and it was not I but Mr. Hall who mistook tho name, and he has cloarly statediEat he meant his reply for mo. - 1 received a telegram signed by Mr. Hall referring to ode from me. I, had, rtovef sent Wh a telegram; indeed I had v a«ver sent a private telegram in my life to Mr. Hall, and have no unofficial correspoodeact tfitb him. „ ,- Consequently I could not regard the message otherwise tlau \ is- »a trap tunl forgery. Obviously I had not v the least ; reason to suppose Mr. Waterhouso concerned. At that' moment the sir was full of rumors and the invention of Opposition writers was largely exercised ia producing political skits of all kinds, which creflulous or mischievous people telegraphed about tbe country. That morning I had. read oue of these, *ptofafisinjr Uvjuuna _ certain rathet improbable giitiJioea as MdgT ¦ J about fo replaco sorao of Ine %lnutryi j ' Mrv *- HalPs telegram would have been a reasonable außwcr to any message recapitulating the con- > * tents Of this skit, and the solution of the ¦ matter' whtch occurred to me was that somebody had forged my name to such a telegram addressed to Mr. Hall, and that he had regarded me as an outgoing Minister, and sent a sympa* thetic reply. Otherwise, it might have been a forgery of Mr. HauVnatoe, sent to "draw" me on the subject of the supposed split in the Cabin>tl git aU ejAnta I lpoked upon It as «, lorgery, and in showing it itf Confidbnto to tey' colleagues, and .asking, their advice, I did what I consider hritural and right. To say .that a forger can protect himself by putting " private >y on the document would be ridiculous. ,-My colleagues concurred in my view, but tho comical side of the matter struck them more forcibly than it did me, and they thought it was probably meant as a-joko. , However, ». Mr. Fisher kindly examined 'all the telegrams' bearing my signature for the past few days at the Wellington office, and 1 wired to Mr. Hall to that enquiries might, be made at tho Christchurch end. The result was unexpected. Mr. Hall replied tbat on a second reading he found that he had mistaken the sfgnttiird '.which **> " Whitohouse." Ou this I applied to Mr. Waterhouse, who admitted tho paternity of the original telogram, and I handed'TJver Mr.- - Hall's wUli my reply, of which I have now ntf copy. I remember- However, having told Mr. Hall that I had shown the telegram to my colleagues. • , . This ii {he whole story fts far as 1 or my colleagues are concerned; i It does not explain all tho reports which have been ia circulation, Hvilh whichi however; none of .Ministry t - have any" connection. , As a rule, those report! t have sfiown a complete^ misconception ,s( ,ttl6 () , contents of Mr. Waterhousb's first telegram, which he had the opportunity,' butthosd ;; tb remove. . In his, letter- he gave what j«M> • portetf to-be Tan account of Whafheiiadwritten,' i but sto'ppedlsho'ft just as lie ¦ became interesting. Why did he not give the names" of ttfe n propose?! Ministry, of- hUtolegrtm ? . As.he. has not done,\»o, ,1 .will; try to'afecount for 1 thV' omission. ' Had fie tola the r wH»lortrllh,^» believe he would have, shown, that he had jumped too credulously to the conclusion that the politioal squibabow alluded to was true, and had hastened to fom'milnicato his dutaltelltgenetfT to his political friends. > ToJaave exposed himself thus -asja retailer of silly^sanards was too gallißg to his /pride, and $*' pMerWiJ tb put forward an account which .was hardly ingenuous., He, however, felt it .was true, and that accidentally I had come to know it, and " his .texafion' ha* betrayed an amiable gentlsman into losing his temper and becoming abusive. I * do not intend to follow his example, and therev - fora pass over his uncomplimentary remarks about myself without reply.— -Ijsm. &c.,< . „ ( G. S. Whitmobb. ¦ " l! ii h iii i ' r T