SALE UNDER MORTGAGE.

Evening Post, Volume LXXVII, Issue 101, 30 April 1909, Page 8

SALE UNDER MORTGAGE.

© SOLICITOR AND CLIENT. COUHT OF APPEAL CASE. The relationship of solicitor and client in respect of certain powers of immediate sale under moitgage \\:i& concerned in the rase of John H. Miles, .solicitor, v. Edward M. Hussey,. farmer, both of Martou, resumed before the Court of Apppal this morning. The case was one of appeal from the judgment of Mr. Justice Chapman in an action heard at Palmers ton North, in which Husbey was the plaintiff and Miles, the piesenb appellant, was defendant. Hid Honour then granted an injunction restraining the defendant from exercising the powers ot immediate sale contained in a mortgage held by him over the property of the plainiift. The ground of the application was that Hussey did not know that the power of sale was cxercisable immediately on default in the payment, of interest, and that Miles, as*Hussey's soIkitor, should have explal-ied to him the nature of the power oi sale. The appeal was based on the claim that his Honour"s judgment was eironeous in fact and law. In the 'case before the Court of Appeal, Mr. SkeiTett, K.C., with him Mr. Cook, of Marton, appeared lor the appellant; Mr. Collins, of Marton, with him Mr. Fitzgibbon, for the respondent. Counsel for the appellant urged that there was no evidence of anything unusual in the form of the power of sale, and that a considerably longer period than was usually allowed after default had elapsed before the right to exercise the power of pale arose. The respondent had no 3erious ground of complaint, and was not entitled 1 to an injunction, which should not have been granted except upon the usual terms of plaintiif paying into court the full amount of principal and interest. This morning Mr. Collins, for the respondent, produced affidavits to show that the statutory power of pale was usual. He submitted that any variation from that power should be fully and thoroughly explained, as a part of the duty of a solicitor to his client. Their Honours elected to reserve their decision.

Arthur Mynors Stietch .'•hot at a rabbit on Ohiro-road tho other day, and this morning appealed in the S M. Court on an information netting out that he ha-d discharged firearms within the city boundary without having first obtained permission to do su lie was fined 20.«, with costs. Whilst a carpenter named Robeit M'Alietei' was emja^ed in repairing the Day's Bay wharf yet-lerday he received a severe blow on the back of the head from a jib which was used for lowering f-tnngers over the side of the wlinif. The injured man was transferred to town and medical assistance rendered To-day, the College Governors held their usual meeting, there being present : — Messrs. A. do B. Brandon (chairman), A. Warburton, E. Lee, W. H. Field, M.P., and Miss Richmond. The financial statement showed a bank balance oE £1801 7s 3d, and cash in hand £3 ss. Payments required and passed amounted to £773 5s 9d. A discussion concerning the Girls' High School in reported, elvwbep*.

WHAT CONSTITUTES A LOAD? « TWO HORSES AND 11 TONS 6CWT "Not guilty" was the plea entered today in a case in which the police prosecuted John Taylor, in the Magistrate's Court, on a charge of cruelly ill-treating two hoises drawing a dray, by overloading them with 16 cases of machinery , weighing 11 tons 6cwt. .Evidence was given that defendant — a dri\er ;n; n the employ of Keir and Co. — loaded his lorry on "the Queen's Wharf. Before the horses could move the vehicle two cases of the load had to be taken off, and then five or six men had to pui their shoulders to the wheel. The un fortunate beasts of burden showed unmistakeable evidence of the strain imposed upon them. After much persuasion defendant allowed the load to'bc placed on the weighbridge. The lorry was licensed to carry five tons. Defendant urged that he had no knowledge that he had such a load on. A loaded lorry was always hard to shift at first. He had a leader up the wharf. His Worship, Mr. Riddell, S.M., held that although defendant pleaded not guilty, he had been a driver for eleven years, and it nmst have been patent that the load was an excessive one. He considered that defendant was guilty of gross negligence. Accordingly a fine of £4 was inflicted, with costs 11s. The alternative was fixed at four f "en days' imprisonment. One week was allowed in which to make the payment. Mr. Jackson was counsel for defendant. Henry Whelan was also charged with cruelly ill-treating a horse. The Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals prosecuted. It was stated that the horse was being worked whilst suffering from a sore back. Mr. Meredith asked for a nominal penalty as a warning to other drivers. The court ordered payment of a fine of 20s, with costs £1 Bs, in default forty-eight hours' imprison ment