A STUDENTS OF TRUTH CASE.

Lyttelton Times, Volume C, Issue 11665, 23 August 1898, Page 3

A STUDENTS OF TRUTH CASE.

WORTHINGTON v. WOOLEY. JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT. . There was a very large gathering of ex-members of the Students of Truth congregation at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, to hear the case of A. B. Worthington v. W. Wooley, in which a great deal of interest appeared to be taken by those who at the time of the transaction in question were members of the body. The case had been partly heard on August 15, and had then been adjourned for the production of further evidence. Mr Beetham, S.M., was on the Bench. The claim was for £ll 9s. Plaintiff was not represented by counsel, but Mr E. D. Thomas .appeared for the defendant.

The plaintiff alleged that in 1892 the defendant, a carter, who was one of the Students, losfc_ by death a horse, and applied to him for a loan of money to enable him to purchase another. He further alleged that he lent the defendant £8 10s, but that there was no receipt or agreement. The defence was that the horse had been bought with money raised by subscriptions amongst the congregation, and handed to defendant by one of them oh the understanding that he was to work it out for the Students, and on this understanding he had done work for various members of the congregation up to the value of the horse. Evidence was given by several persons who had been associated in getting up the subscription list, and by others who had subscribed for the horse, all of whom bore testimony to the fact that the horse was given to Wooley by the congregation, Worthington having asked them to subscribe for it, and after it had been handed over to Wooley he thanked them . for having again placed Wooley in a position to earn his living. The plaintiff recalled several witnesses, but did not shake their evidence in chief. He put in as evidence an affidavit which he had published in the newspapers soon after leaving Christchurch for Tasmania, in which he professed to give a correct account of all the moneys which had passed through his hands belonging to the Students of Truth, and in which the payment of £8 10s to Wooley was described as a gift, and he went into the witness-box, and gave evidence to the effect that at the time of making the affidavit he had no expectation of returning to the colony, and he therefore had a right to regard the matter as a gift. But this, he claimed, did not take away his legal right to recover the amount now he had returned. Without calling on Mr Thomas to reply, Mr Beetham said that with the evidence before him he could come to no other conclusion, especially with the statement of accounts in the affidavit, £8 10s for horse given to Wooley, that the plaintiff had no claim. . . Mr Worthington: You will see that I also state that the whole of the moneys were mine. His Worship: It is abundantly clear that they could not have been yours. Mr Worthington: I left in that work over £6OOO in cash.

His Worship: Yes, but you do not say where you got it from. Mr Worthington proceeded to make some further remarks when his Worship cut him short with, “Rubbish. Judgment for defendant, with costs.”