Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.

THE COURTS.—TO-DAY.

SUPREME COURT—IN CHAMBERS.

(Before Hia Honor Mr Justice Williams.) Re Real Estate of Patrick Dunlop, deceased. —Motion in terms of petition filed herein (Mr Kettle). —Accordingly. Re Jeremiah O’Keefe, deceased.—Petition of administrator for remuneration and motion for payment of costs, etc. (Mr Gallaway). Accordingly ; referred to Registrar as to commission. Schmidt v. Dunediu Corporation.—Summons by defendants for order to have Knmpthorne and Co.’s New Zealand Drug Company joined as party to action (Mr Chapman). —Accordingly. Re Mills and others and Settled Land Act.—Motion for appointment of James Mills and David Mills as trustees herein (Mr Qosking).—Accordingly. Eversfield v. Union SteamShip Comp ny. —Summons by defendant for trial by ap.eial jury of twelve (Mr W. D. Stewaitj.— Accordingly. Brown v. Samson and tee Smith.—Summons by defendant for leave to serve notice under rule 05, and to join the Equitable Assurance Company as defendant (Mr Chapman).—Decision reserved. Motions ros Pbobate. —Accordingly re John Washburn Hunter (Mr M’Keay), Alex. M'Lachlan (MrSim), Casper Hehrick Aulert (Mr Sim), Edward Martin (Mr Reid), Ratrick Collins (Mr Gallaway), Patrick Fox (Mr Gallaway), John Mackay (Mr J. Macgregor), Geo r ge Davidson (Mr Webb), David Gloag (Mr Findlay). Re Jane Ann Sinclair, deceased. —Motion for letters of administration (Mr D. Stewart). —Accordingly. Re Robert Reid, deceased.—Motion for reference to Registrar to inquire and report as to remuneration for executors (Mr Sinclair). —Accordingly.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

(Before E, H. Carew, Esq., R.M.)

Judgment was given for plaintiffs, by de* fault, in the following casesQ. Htllyer v. J. Oliver, claim, 17s fid, for goods supplied ; Official Assignee v, E. Lovell, L4O 19s lOd.

Braid v, Robertson and others.--In this previously-heard case His Worship now gave judgment as followsl am not free from doubt as to how far sections 32 and 33, Fencing Act, 1881, give jurisdiction os to boundaries, but this case seems just such a one as is in Tanner v. Thomson, page 72, to be within the power of a Resident Magistrate's Court to deal with. X think, therefore, I should deal with it The evidence convinces me that the Crown grants must have been issued on Prentice’s survey, and not on Proudfoot’s, and that Begg’s survey of 1883-84 corresponds with Prentice’s in respect to the boundary line in dispute. There is no doubt, also, that the old fence put up by Braid and Robertson encroached considerably on Braid’s land, in fact was erected on Prondfoot’s instead of Prentice’s line) but it is claimed for tho defence that twenty years’ undisturbed possession is conclusive against Braid, whether the fence was erected on the proper boundary or not. In Eldridge v, Knott it was laid down that where a party relies on a statutory limitation no lapse of time but that of the full period fixed by statute will justify a presumption in support of the claim. Now, the evidence of Robert Stewart and John Robertson agrees that the erection of the fence was commenced about March, 1864, and it would necessarily be some time later before the division fence could have been completed, and before completion there could have been no exclusive possession by Robertson. Begg’s survey was commenced some time in the latter part of the year 1883, and completed on the land before the Ist March, 1884—the date of the plan. The evidence shows that as the survey progressed tho bush was cleared Bft wide along Braid's side of the survey line, and that on one occasion Robertson, senior, was there, and did not interfere. This seems to me strong evidence of an interruption of Robertson’s possession, and nothing could indicate in a more marked manner the intention to disturb and dispute Robertson’s claim to the land than marking out a boundary and clearing a wide strip of bush up to and along it. The defendants have not proved undistarbed possession for twenty years, and I am satisfied the old fence was erected by mistake on the wrong line. I (therefore order in terms of the complaint(l) Tho removal by the defendants of the portion of fence erected by them since the 16th February, 1889, referred to in paragraph six of the complaint. (2) That a dividing fence shall be erected between sections 51 and 62 on the boundary line between the two sections known as Prentice’s survey and shown on the land by Begg’s survey. (8) That the fence to be erected shall be that described in the notice to fence Braid to Robertson, dated February, 1889, and that it shall be erected by the complainant. (4) That the cost of erecting the said fence shall be equally divided between complainant and defendants —that is to say, each defendant shall pay the complainant one-half of the cost of the fence along his boundary.”—ln reply to Sir Robert Stout, His Worship said he would fix the costs on Monday. William Gordon v. J. R. Briggs.—Claim, L6l 4s, balance of wages and commission alleged to be due to plaintiff, as traveller for defendant. Mr Sim appeared for plaintiff; Mr Milne, for defendant, who put in a set-off amounting to L 167 10s fid, for moneys alleged to have been received by plaintiff on defendant’s behalf.—Alter evidence had been taken, judgment was given for plaintiff for L 59 18s fid, with costs. J. O’Brien v. J. Gorman.—Claim, L 6 15s fid, account due for grazing of cattle. Mr Macdonald appeared for plaintiff; Mr Sim for defendant, who put in a set-off amounting to L 6 8s fid, for work done and horss hire.

[Left sitting.]

CITY POLICE COURT,

(Before Mr J. L. Gillies and General Fulton, 3. P.s.)

Petty Larceny, Edward Synnott was charged with stealing from the Botanical Gardena on'the 10th insfc. pieces cf two brass cups, valued at 2s, the property of the Dunedin Corporation, Accused pleaded guilty, but said that he took the articles under the impression that they were useless.—John M'Bain, curator of the Botanical Gardens, said that a conple of cups—a presentation made by the late Robert Gillies had been broken, and witness thought that they would be taken away later on. Accused was employed at work in the gardens, being sent there with a letter from the Benevolent Institution. —James Wilson, an apprentice in the Botanical Gardens, said that he saw the pieces of cups in the possession of accused. Witness was told to keep an eye on accused, who subsequently admitted that he had taken the pieces of cups, but did not know that they were of any use. He said he would return them if they were wanted,— Sergeant-major Bevin said that accused was convicted previously of disorderly conduct and fined 40s.—Accused: Don’t be hard on me, your Worship; it won’t occur again. The accused farther said that he was about nineteen years of age, and was in receipt of assistance—monetary and otherwise—from the Benevolent Institution.—The Bench convicted accused, who was ordered to come up for sentence when called upon, Mr Gillies advised accused to obtain employment in the country, so as to Re removed from tempta tiori. He might not have been a boy of evil manners, but he was evidently easily led away. Obscene Language. Janet Kay (four previous convictions), charged with making use of obscene language on the Woodend road, on May 27. within the hearing of passers-by, pleaded guilty.—Sergeant-major Bevin said that accused had been previously convicted of obscene language four times. The language was used to a neighbor, and Constable Millar, who heard the words used, made the charge. She was sentenced to six weeks’ imprisonment about four or five yean ago.—The Bench sentenced accused to fourteen days’ imprisonment. —Accused: “ Oh, I’ll take that I”

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18890531.2.23

Bibliographic details

THE COURTS.—TO-DAY., Evening Star, Issue 7921, 31 May 1889

Word Count
1,272

THE COURTS.—TO-DAY. Evening Star, Issue 7921, 31 May 1889

Working