DISTRIOT COURT.

Evening Post, Volume XXIV, Issue 42, 8 September 1882, Page 3

DISTRIOT COURT.

This Dat. (Before Mr. E. HardcuMe, District Judge.) HAODONALD V. BASOOTTST AND ROAST. This o*se vm withdraws,, on the application of Mr. Gully. BUMNX V. CHAMBI&LAIN. In this case, adjonrned from last Comrt day, his Honour annonnoed thai he would deliver judgment at Maiterton on hi* next visit to that township. DUdffAN V. PMKMJB. This was an action instituted by Christopher Duggan, lioensoftof Tatteraall's Hotel, to reoover the sum of JJIOO from Isaac Plitnmer, publican, as damages alleged to have been sustained by the notion of the defendant in plaoing bailiffs in the house of Mm. Hannay, who is the plaintiff's widowed tutor, and over whose property tho plaintiff held a bill of sale. Mr. Ollivier appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Edwards for the defendant. A jury consisting of Messrs. J. W. Adair, H. O. Aitkin, 0. Ambrose, and E. T. Allan, was empanelled.

Mr. Ollivier opened the case for the plaintiff by stating the particulars thereof, and oonoluded his remarks by asking his Honour whether the order made in the oa«e Dnggan v. Plimmer, heard ia the Reiident Magistrate's Court, did not settle the present Mr. Edwar. 1 c objected op tho ground that the application was premature, and theobjeotion was upheld by his Honour. The defendant was abont to be plaoed in the hot by plaintiff's 1 counsel when Mr. Edwards objected, as enoh a course was opposed to precedent. His Honour disallowed the objection, and the evidence was proceeded with. Isaao Plimmer deposed that some time ago Mrs. Hannay was indebted to him in a certain sum for goods supplied. He obtained judgment and issued execution. At that time she was residing at Tattersall's Hotel, and witness was carrying on business as a wine and spirit merohant. Mr. Kdwarda was his solicitor in the proceedings whioh he instituted against Mrs. Hannay, and advised him to take ont an exeontion. He did not know how long the bailiff* remained ia possession, nor oould he tay whether they were in the honse when the interpleader oase was heard. He did not rsooileot Mr. Kane, from the offloe of Messrs. Ollivier and Co., making a demand upon him for the delivery of the goods whioh he had caused to be seized. He had not received notice that the leitor demanding delivery of the goods would be required to-day. When it was suggested that the bailiffs should ba withdrawn, witness did not offer any objection, but Mr. Edwards opposed it. He signed an indemnity in referenoe to these goods. He had done nothing personally as to returning the goods, amongst whioh was a billiard table, whioh witness had sold her for £90. The witness was then subjected to an examination by Mr. Edwards, who elicited that the billiard table had been sold for £40 cash, and a bill for £50, but before the latter had matured Mrs. Hannay gave her brother ft bill of sale over it. ' Robert Rollo, oopying clerk in Messrs. Ollivier and Co.'a offloe, gave evidence in reference,, to the delivery of the letter re giving up possession of the goods. The defendant was re-examined by Mr. Ollivier, and stated that he was advised not to deliver the goods on reooipt of a oopy of the order made in the lower Court. Henry Gordon, chief bailiff, gave evidenoe as to the seizure of Mrs. Duggan's property. He retired from the position on receipt of the ordar made by Mr. Hardoastle as Resident Magistrate, but his man oontinued in possession as private bailiff, and was paid by Messrs. Edwards and Co. [Left sitting.]