ARROW DISTRICT COURT.

Lake County Press, Volume VII, Issue 380, 22 August 1878, Page 2

ARROW DISTRICT COURT.

Thursday, A- gun 15th. (Before His Honor Judge Harvejt J. F. Healer (trust, e in the \ n vent estate of K. Donoghu") v. || Cope. Claim of £2 0 for ffr()w conversion of the bankrupt's prop/,! Mr Turton appeared for plaintiffj Finn for defendant. Some time was occupied in hea» counsel on b>th sides tor amending in plaint and defence, which weieen tuallv made J, F. Healey deposed th it he wasjt appointed trustee in the esta:o nf Donoghue, and in that caporfty dim, ded from defendant the restitution, certain propei ty conveyed tb him Donoghue by billot sale within i| months of the h.tter filing his setHi Defendant denied liability, and pr es , action was then brought. In cross-examination witness g> ( that he served notice of demand n B( fendant personally ; and that onlytl of bankrupt's creditors had proved sanctioned these proceedings. E. D noghue—Filed declaration insolvency on 13th March, 1878. 19fch I ecember, 1877, gave Cope a of oale over all my property, exc, wearing apparel and bedding. By His Honor—l sai I alttue.nso the bill of sale did not include a w a l race, because I had not got it at I time. My name is O'D. noghue, | since J came to th" Colony I haveai ted the name Donoghue." I have reason for doing s >. Examination continued—Got £4B! from ('one in cash, and gave none ol back to him at any time He ti possession of the house when I »avel the bill of sale by ordering us out.i going in himself. We werp out of house aboot five minutes, and them biek and bad control of all th* ati« mentioned in lull of s,»le. He had) oats that were growing, although li them cut by Ins orders. He paid the cutting. I u«ed a few of the pi toes. The license was in my nani?,! continued so until i' expired. A ( night or three weeks a'u r giving bil sab-I agreed to tike back conkingut sils. spirits, and cardials Willi) it did not take place next day or «j( three duvs. Might have been withi week. I was to g V e £lO f3r theoij have n>t yet paid the money. Ti of goods was £lO. When I "said { in Queenst'wn, I might have m wholesale value. Would value oali £lO His Honour—ln Queenscnwn t valued them at £lB 15s. Not a» you say i* trus' worthy. Yo.i <lo mislead the Court bv it. Fxtitnina ion continued.—Tne 8 ! infill that I owed Cope £K'7 9s it correc, ami 1 catiii>t. xpliiu i*. Gl neiiti .ue I in |)id of vale Wt'P worth more than £IOO. C pei pressing: me for the monev. Theitf meni to lease (produced) was si; alt- rwards ; but dated back P.ii to Cope on aOtn May. This wa< i m\ filing. Gave no notice to trust! the payment. Also paid him £1 be! I failed. Made no airingem-iit «l the license, and did not sell it toC £59 16s of the £IOO w;;s for moiier go-ds. Mr Finn thought plaintiff *astrj to make a case against not against Cope. j B. Donoghue (cross-examineife When I gave the bill of sale fori I bad a contract with the County & cil, for which 1 expected £6O in Ft! ary- C>pe wanted to put u friea the house, but told me 1 coulds until he arrived. Told rjjost of creditors that I had given Cope a of sale, and none of them oj'Ctei was refus d credit afterwards. W» square uy my other debts when Cos paid. Filed because Jenkins, Andc and Colville, and Mrs Naylor sued Cope used the horses as his own ate gave bill of sale, and sometimes sb| in the house- He used chaff from o There was a ton and a hall or t*o* It was oaten bay. When Cope of' to let me slay in house, I off-red I 5s a week. Gave him £lO forßb in-trade. Agreement was dated t" because I had taken money i' ; meantime. Cope gave me value W £IOO. His Honor—Before you saio* were 75 bushels of oats, now it is' His Honor said the bill of sale! been given on property in the posses' oi Donoghue. If the registration■ bill of sale turned out to be b«d property might fall into the band! the creditors ; and, if good, tfcereni; have been a fradalent preference. Mr Fi-n a c v? : lit- iioo ll ''

H. J. Cope—The hill of sale was ginned <'ii 19th December and hied iu t :e Supreme Court on the 3rd JanuaryThe cause «'f delay was the holidays intervening. The account produced is correct t'..r contra nnd cash. Found that D moghue had turned overaceounts toother pa'ties, and wanted some security myself. Bought the place for a friend WO I expected from Adelaide. Let D Miojjhue have the stock for £lO. There was so little of it that I thought to get some parties together and drink it. The property fetched about £7O at miction. Went to creditors and they told me they were satisfied. Cross-examined —Saw present plaintiff. Healey and others said they would have a setoff for the Geraldiue case. The affair was a bona-fide one on my part- There were no oats, but about two acres and a half of hay. Tots closed the case for the plaintiff. Mr Finn moved fur a nonsuit on the grounds, 1, That the trustee must apply to the** Court lor leave to sue, which had not been done; 2. That no conversion haShe n proved ; 3. That there was no demand and no refusal, handing a letter io » party not being a sufficient demand; 4, That no proof had been given of the go d* being Donoghue's. Quoted au thorities in -upport. Mr Tuiton replied, holding that the nonsuit points were not sound, and cited authorities. For the defence, Mr Finn called H. J Cope-In December, 1877. Donoghue i wed me over £SO lot value rec< ived. When I demanded payment he said he would like to clear out. and off-red to sell me his hc-wo. I gaee him lull value for i\ He sold and I bought in the usual manner, hut I al-o got a bill of sale as an additional security for myself. He told me he owed a little money, but that what was owing him by the County Council would pay all. I allowed him to remain at a nominal rent, with a month's notice. Have acted as owner of the property bince December. Am a serious loser by the transaction. Cross examined—lt was a bona-fide s.le. Did nut Donoghuu to renew license for house. Mr Finn proposed to call other witnesses, but by bis Honor considered it unnecessary. He was satisfied of the bona-fide character of Mr Cope's connection with the business. Mr Turton contended that the bill of sale *as us lr->s on the gr unds that the jura; wa< ha-i, and that the affidavits i.n I desciip im were insufficient. Mr Finn - It the bill of sale is void, it is lor the Supreme Court to declare it, 't having been registered there. Thi- Court has U> jurisdiction H 8 H nor—lf i nnd it to be void, I will declare it so. Judgment reserved till next sitting.