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 His Honor Mr Justice Williams.) 7fc Charles Edward HaywarT), deceased. —Motionfor order allowing administratrix to sell certain lands, and for costs (Mr J. Macgreaor).—Order accordingly. D'Albedyhll v. D'Albedyhll.—Motion fixiDg time, place, and mode of tiixl (Mr A. S. Adams).—At September sittings of Comt, before a special jury. Re Francis John Hocking, deceased.-" Motion for remuneration to executor, with Registrar's report (Mr Sim).—-Report confirmed.

Re, Matthew Wilson, deceased.—Motion for probate (Mr Findlay).—Order accordingly. Re Janet White, deceased,—Motion for probate to the Perpetual Trustees, Estate, and Agency Company (Mr Hislop).—Order accordingly. Be David Gloa<*, deceased.- -Motion for rcgrant of probate (Mr Findlay).—Order accordingly. Re John Jamie, deceased—Motion for probate to Jane Suttie (Mr J. Macgregor). —Order accordingly. Re John Anderson, deceased.—Motion for probate to Barbara Anderson (Mr Wilkinson).—Order accordingly. Rs William Mawson, deceased.—Motion for probate to Anthony Hall (Mr Wilkinson), —Order accordingly.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before Messrs J, D, Feraud and T. C. Da Lacy, Justices.)

T. Collins v, Mary Cecilia Council.— Claim, 18s, for milk supplied.—Judgment by default. Robert Francis v. Robert James Stewart. —Claim, L 6, on a promissory note endorsed by defendant. Mr A. S. Adams for plaintiff, who said that defendant had admitted the debt and promised to confess judgment, but had not done so.—Judgment by default.

Same v. George Boraman (the second endorser of the bill). Judgment by default.

Same v. Charles Beeby, jun. (the maker of the bill).— Judgment by default,

CITY POLICE COURT.

(Before Messrs W. Hutchiaon and J. Logan, J.P.s.) Drunkenness,—A first offender was convicted and discharged. Illegally. Pawning.— Abraliain Myers was charged by Thomas Nesbitt Wilson with possessing a watch which had been illegally pawned, and which was at present in his possession, and an order for restitution was therefore asked. Sir Robert Stout appeared for defendant; Mr Haggitt for complainant.—-Sir Robert Stout Bald that he believed the watch was in possession of the police, the person who pawned the watch having been committed for trial on oharges of larcsny as a bailee, and if an order were made he could not see how the watch could hi restored, because defendant did not have it in his possession. Mr Haggitt said that complainant had left the watch in the hands of a watchmaker named Ross, who had pawned it along with others and had been committed for trial on a charge of larceny as a bailee. The watch belonged to Mr Wilson, and he only asked that his property be restored to him. If the article were required at the Supreme Court sessions Mr Wilson would take care that the watch would be produced then.—Complainant said he had discovered that Rose, a watchmaker, had pawned a watch which had been left at his shop for repairs. Defendant refused to give it up. and Ross was subsequently arreated and committed for trial. The watch produced belonged to witness; he recognised it by his monogram and crest.—Detective Walker said the watch was produced in Court at the hearing of the case against Robs according to an order forwarded to Shields, an assistant in Mr Myers's employ.—Sir Robert Stout submitted that the Court had no jurisdiction to make an order against defendant for restitution of the watch, because the watch was in the possession of the police. There never was a case like the present one heard before in New Zealand where a pawnbroker was summoned to deliver up a watch which was not in his possession. On that point he submitted that the Court had no jurisdiction.—MrHaggittsaid fiat the watch could be taken from the police authorities at any time by Mr Myers. If tho article were required as an exhibit at the sessions of the Supreme Court, it should have been forwarded when the depositions were made.— Sir Robert Stout replied that the exhibits were not always forwarded to the Supreme Court when the depositions were made. In a horse-stealing case, was the horse forwarded as an exhibit ?Mr Haggitt: It should be, at any rate.—Sir Robort Stout said that if all exhibits were taken away from the police before the Supreme Court sessions commenced they would never be able to ensure their production, and eases would thereforo be made weak, and perhaps fail. He called Detective Walker and Chief-detective Henderson to prove that exhibits were always retained by the police when the case was to come before the Supreme Court, and said that the watch being in the custody of the police, no order could be made by the Bench against Mr Myers. Defendant said he claimed that he was entitled to the watch after the Supreme Coart trial was concluded. He would then ask the Judge whether he was to retain tho watch or to be compensated for the money advanced.—Mr Hutchison 89 id there was not the slightest chance of the Bench agreeing or coming to any decision. He held a very strong opinion that tho watch should be handed to Mr Wilson, but his colleague held strong views to the contrary. Perhaps it would be the best thing to call in a third Justice, and to hear the case over again.—Sir Robert Stout suggested that the case should be heard before Mr Carew, Resident Magistrate.— Mr Haggitt said it was a hardship that a man could not enjoy his own property.— Sir Robert Stout said there was another consideration—juatice should be done.—Mr Haggitt said that justice would be done if the watch were handed to Mr Wilson. The case was ultimately adjourned until Thursday.

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/ESD18890723.2.10

Bibliographic details

THE COURTS.-TO-DAY., Evening Star, Issue 7966, 23 July 1889

Word Count
920

THE COURTS.-TO-DAY. Evening Star, Issue 7966, 23 July 1889

Working