THE COURTS-TO-DAY

Evening Star, Issue 16996, 19 March 1919, Page 6

THE COURTS-TO-DAY

SUPREME COURT.—IN BANCO. (Before His Honor Mr Justice Sim.) In the matter of the estate of William Bennett, the Public Trustee v. Georgina Catherine Bennett and others. An originating summons for the interpretation ol a will and the determination of certain questions.—Mr A. S. Adams appeared for the Public Trustee, Mr J. S. Sinclair fo» Mrs Bennett, and Mr S. Solomon, K.C. with Mr C. J. Payne for Thomas BermetyJj -—Mr Adams said ha thought in the rest .'J it would be found that the parties hj; practically agreed to what the answe should be. The first three questions raisi j were ns to whether or not ther’l was a partial intestacy under the wilL The fourth question dealt with a sum o* £122 14s 6d. an advance by the testate® te his son William. That was admitted to be a loan without interest.—Hie Hone® asked what was the point of differences Mr Adams: Simply as to the first tw« sums of £SOO each which the afflda' show were paid in consideration of vices the sons had rendered on the .jß[ prior to its sale.—Mr Solomon said '4H the matter had been before the P Trustee for years, and he thought it been disposed of long ago. It again arcs? m consequence of the question of the construction of the will, and he discussed the legal view with Mr Adams. It was agreed that his client was to give np any claim to one £SOO, an d in turn the first £6o® was not to be brought into action. —Mr nenn 18 lt was a «? re °d that the second £6OO to Thomas Bennett should be treated as an advancement during life, and that, no order be made in regard to that. submitted that on tho face of the will vH was the strongest possible evidence c intention to give the children equal on the death of the widow.—Mr So - , said that so far as Thomas Bennett concerned he confirmed what Mr At-JB had said as to the agreement arrived at tween the Public Trustee and himself. Ihe Public Trustee had abandoned any claim to call upon Thomas Bennett to account for the first sum of £SOO, and ha (Mr Solomon) agreed that he was not entitled to claim for the second sum.—Mr Sinclair said the will clearly indicated that the testator was under tho impression that lie had provided for the children so far aa capital was concerned. —-His Honor said it was clear from the construction of the provisions of the will that the testator intended, after the death of his wife, that the estate should go to his children. It.-, was true that there were no direct wojjt* *|j of a gift, but the testator used words whic i made it clear that his children should tak 1 bis estate after his wife’s death. Thai would mean that they should take equa" shares. His Honor then adjourned thi ■ matter to t®> sitting in chambers on Friday, when ho said a draft judgment could bo submitted; the costs of all parties to be fixed by the registrar and paid out of tho estate. George Howell (deceased), James Jioweli, and another v. Maudlinn Wilkia and another.—An originating summons for the interpretation of a will.—Mr Allan appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr Lemon ior the infant daughter of the deceased son of the_ testator.—Mr Allan said thr mam question was whether the trustee! s.iould surrender a lease, which was really a burden upon tho estate, and take over a freehold section and sell that section. A* an alternative he (Mr Allan) suggested that instead of surrendering the lease authority he given to sell the lease of the property to the present landlords, James and .Inomas Howell.—His Honor made an order authorising the plaintiffs to sell the two j m seGions to the plaintiffs, James and Ihomas Howell; costs of all parties te be fixed by the registrar and paid out of the estate. CITY POLICE COURT. (Before H. Y. Widdowgon. Esq., S.M.) Drunkenness.—A first offender was fined in default 24 hours’ imprisonment. Breaking and Entering.—James Williams and William James Duncan were charged with breaking and entering the premises of Macdougall and Co., with intent to commit a crime.—On the application of Senior Sergeant Murray they were remanded til! Friday. Addicted to Drugs.—Annie Maria Parker Walker (Mr Irwin) pleaded guilty te a charge of stealing two nightdresses, valued at £1 Bs, the property of Myrtle Isabella Horn brook.—.Mr Irwin said the accused admitted taking otic. It blew over into her yard from complainant’s yard next door.—Senior Sercreant Murray said ono nightdress was discovered in a secondhand dealer’s place, where accused had sold it.—Complainant said the clothes could not have blown over into the other yard..—Senior Sergeant Murray said the woman was a victim of the drug habit; there was a previous conviction against her.—Mr Irwin said she had been bitten by a dog some years ago; abscesses had formed on her leg. and she spent most of her time in hospital. Whenever she could, she got this drug, and her sister fearer] that if she were committed to a home and entirely deprived of it, it would he passing sentence of death upon her.— The case was adjourned till to-morrow, in order that the Court might have the opinion of Dr Ritchie, who had attended her. By-laws.—For failing to keep as near ns practicable to flic left side when driving across the intersection of streets, Georgo Long and Martin T'ovle were fined 5s each and costs i7.«b Edward M'Millan was similarly charged* and the senior sergeant said that through driving on the wrong side defendant collided with a cyclist. He was fined 10s and costs (£1 3s). Maintenance. —Alex. Archibald Moir was brought before the Court as being of sufficient ability to contribute towards the support of a bov in the Industrial School. There was already an order of 10s a week, against him in respeH of another child.— The Magistrate said he recollected the case. Defendant said the child was not his. and his wife said he. was.--Mr Moore (for defendant I examined his client as to means. He said l»s average earnings were £2 10s a week. He naid 10s n. week for one child, rent 7s6d. and life insurance Is a week. That loft 31s 6d for him and his wife to live on.— T lie Maaistrale said the wife had staled she earned 22s 6d a week. —Defendant exploded with laughter, remarking that lie bad never seen tho money.—-The Magistrate: “That is because'both of von drink.” He went on to cav Dint both were addicted te drink, and Die children had had to lie removed from them. Between them the parents_ could earn good money. —Mr Moore said the man was not drinicing now. and the wife was not working. — An order of 2s 6d a week was made. (Before H. A, Young. Esq., S.M.) Alaintonance. —IViiliam Pickworth (Mr Tonkinsnn) asked for a reduction of an order against him to pay 35s a week for the support of bis wife, Annette Pickworth (Mr Hanlon), claiming that his circumstances had altered since the order was made. —It will be remembered that these parties faced each other recently in the civil court, the man claiming furniture valued at £ll6 5s from his wife, and it being then hinted that the sale of some of this furniture by the wife (who for her part claimed it. was her furniture) should be a set-off against the order. In this case he was nonsuited, on the ground that he had made no legal" demand ” for the furniture. —To-day Pickworth said he thought the money she got for the furniture should go towards her keep.—After hearing evidence the Magistrate reduced the order to 25s a week. There was an application by the wife for the recovery of arrears, and the husband applied for their remission. A partial remission, was made, and for the balance he .was ordered to pay it off at the rate of £T a week, in default three months’ imprisonment.