SUPREME COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXV, Issue 9431, 4 June 1891, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.

Wednesday, Junb 3. ; , ; IN BANcp.

(Before Hia Honor Mr Justice Dennieton.) ' WAITAKI HOSPITAL AND CHARITABLE AID iBOARD (APPELLANT) V. SOUTH OANTBS- . BURT HOSPITAL AND CHARITABLE AID ■ BOABD'(RESPONDENT). iMr Cohen for appellant j Mr Joynt for • respondent. >Thia case waa an appeal against a ' decision of the Resident Magistrate at Timaru, who. on Sept. 3, 1890, gave judgmeat against'the Waitaki Board for JE9 2s • od, for the. maintenance of one Thomas . JMdda in the' Timaru Hospital, and for the •apply of rations to his wife and family while be was in the Hospital. > Dodds had come from Oatnayn- to Timaru on Oct. 26, 1889, was., received into the Timaru Hospital on April 11, 1890, and remained ;i;wtfc»ihMtill i! -he .died; on‘ May 13; The case. “ :: Mraediuponi the’ interpretation of Section ’ - of-the: Hospital and Charitable Inatitu~.i. fMrta. A c.tj-and ..the (Magistrate held that, the intention .rdfi the Legislature, it must mean that one district-could claim. dost bf relief of any person who had entered it from the latter not more than six months previous to receiving relief, provided he had spent six months continuously in the latter district immediately before leaving it. .(His Honor gave judgment as follows: — Section 74 of toe “ Hospitals and Charitable ■ Institutions Act, 1885,” is as follows: — "If an institution under this Act afford • relief to any person coming from beyond tke contributing districts in which such institution is situated, it shall be lawful for the trusties, or the Board having the control of the institution affording relief; to recover from the Board of the district from which such person came the entire 0 f such relief, provided that the person has resided in the last-mentioned district. at' leasfc six months next before he ;r ebteised xdasfc'* These words; used in

thdic grammatical sense.bave a plain mean* in#. It is said, however, that this meaning would lead to such consequences that a i -different construction must be put on them in order to arrive at what, it is said, must be the intention of the Legislature. That intention is, it is said, that any institution affording relief to any person within six months after such person having coma to reside in the district in which such institution is situated, shall be able to recover the cost of such relief from the Board of tho district from which such parson came into the relieving district, provided suohpecson has lived continuously in the former district at least six months before coming into tho relieving district. It is obvious that to give the section this meaning, the words ** at least sis mouths .I next before he entered the institution from I which ho obtained relief,” must be read i " at least six months before he entered .the district in which the institution from which he obtained relief iasituated.” Even if• the result of reading the section naturally were, as suggested, to make it practically inoperative, I do not think 1 should be justified, in the absence of any indication m the rest of the Act, to- do such violence to the language as would be required to give it the meaning put on it by the counsel for respondeat, merely because I thought that such was the probable intention of the Legislature. There is, however, a limited effect which may be. given to the section in its natural meaning. It would meet the case-of persons sent direct from one district where they wore - receiving to another district from which they would, from their indigent condition, at once require to receive relief. Such cases would be infrequent, bub not impossible. As against the suggested construction that the intention of the Legislature was to create a species of “settlement” againsb the last district in which a person receiving relief had resided for sir months, there is the fact that by the terms of the • section the right to recover is given only against the district from which the person obtaining relief last came. Should he not have resided in such district six months, no right exists against it, nor against any other district in which he gwy have previously resided for six months. Although lam not surprised at the decision the Magistrate has arrived at, . I think the appeal must be allowed. Costs ,£io ios.. ; ...... , - : • TAUISH V. PAKIoK AKD ANOTHifI. ■ -Mr Harper,- for Mr -Wynn-Williams, moved for judgment for the plaintiff, - the . trustee under the will of the late W. Parish, bn the finding of a jury, on the first two issues of the case, an action brought to prevent Jacob Parish, a son of the testator, from' bringing under the Land Transfer Act, in his own name, a section of land on which he had lived during and since i the lifetime of his father, but which had not been conveyed to him. •Mr Stringer, with him Mr Deacon, moved for. judgment for defendant on the finding of the Jury on the second issue. After argument, his Honor reserved judgment. ' [Pee Press Association.] AUCKLAND, June 3. At the Supreme Court, B. I*. O’Holloran, lately Chief Postmaster at Whangarei, was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment on each of five charges of embezzlement, to which he pleaded " Guilty ” on Tuesday. The sentences are to run concurrently, MrTole addressed the Court, bo induce his Honor to apply the First Offenders Probation - Act. Mr Justice Conolly said he should have given a longer sentence, as a warning to other persons in positions of trust, hut; that the prisoner's prospects had already been ruined. WELLINGTON, June 3. Mr Ch&pmaii this morning applied for a Special Jury in the dummyism case. His Honor the Judge asked what precedent there was, and Mr Chapman mentioned the case of Allen, accused of stealing amalgam on the West Coast last year, and of Cooper, an asylum warder, charged with embezzlement. The Chief Justice said that there were special circumstances in both these cases. Mr Gully objected, saying it looked as though the accused was anxious to have the benefit of a Jury drawn exclusively from the class to which he belonged. After considerable argument. Chief Justice Prendergast reserved his decision till 3 p.m., when he granted the application. The Chief Justice gave his decision this afternoon upon the application for a special jury in the case against Coleman Phillips for dummyism. He said that on looking into what authorities there were, he had concluded that this was a case in which a special jury might properly be granted on tho defendant's application. It was a kind of Stateprosecution, and was of an unusual character; and notwithstanding the opposition of the Crown a special jury could ho allowed. It must not, however, bq .understood that he was laying down any general rule. The trial was provisionally fixed for j une 17. The. only other case on tho list was Arthur Ellison, alias Dunn, a prisoner who is already serving six months tor obtaining money by telegraphing under a false name. He was now accused 'with forging the receipt which enabled him to got the money. He put iu a special plea to the effect that the offences wore ono and the same. The Jury was directed to consider whether the plea was good, but misunderstood the direction, and returned a verdict of “ Not guilty.” It was sent back, bub in the interval the Chief Justice decided, on reconsideration, that there was ho necessity to leave it to the Jury. ’ The Foreman, on being recalled, said the feeling of the Jury was that the offence was practically the same, and the prisoner should not be punished twice over for ifc. The Crown Prosecutor, though dissenting from this view, recognised that there was no likelihood of gaining a verdict, and offered no evidence. The prisoner was discharged. ' v.-- r DUNEDIN, June,S.

_,The criminal session is , concluded. Henry &bel£n whs acquitted on the charge of Ahooting ’ the. racing mare Disappointment. . ’. ■