The Nelson Evening Mail. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1869.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume IV, Issue 278, 26 November 1869, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1869.

SUPREME COURT; CIVIL SITTINGS. , [Before his Honor Mr. Justice Eichmond]. The case of Leviu v. Beaumont continued from yesterday : — Richard Beaumont cross-examined: After my conversation with Levin in Wellington in January, 1865, I considei'ed that nay money, amounting to £2700, was lent to Tetley. The letter I wrote to Levin in March was written at Tetley's dictation. I fully believed that the money was lent to Tetley iv January. I have no recollection of the money beiug left with Levin upon the same terms as ■ those allowed by the banks. I believe that I received some interest from the time the money was drawn in Mr. Levin's office until it was formally transferred to Tetley. Tetley never told me that he would write to Levin asking him what the price of the sheep would be. I know Mr. Ingles, I met him at Wellington when we first arrived. I saw him shortly after at the Kaikouras. I don't recollect speaking to him on the subject of a sheep investment. I remember my conversation with Mr. Eyes on the Airedale. I don't remember his warning me against publishing a slander. I said that I wished the fact of my retracting my apology to Mr. Levin to be made as " public as the letter itself. I did not enter into partnership with Tetley prior to April 1868. There were several of us iv partnership, and we have beeu held liable by the Bank for the whole overdraft of £13,000. The partnership was for the Awatere property. I employed no solicitor. Mr. Conolly drew up the deed of partnership. From some act of mine the sheriff seized the sheep inKekerangu after Tetley had left for England. Shortly after we arrived from England, Wharton, G-arforth, and myself commenced farming at the Kaikouras. Mr. Levin acted as our agent. We each drew £400 from the money we placed in Tetley's hands. We also got an overdraft of £554. I know this was settled, but I didn't exactly know how. When I met Mr. Leviu and Mr. Pharazyn at Picton Mr. Levin did not tell me of the mortgage of 1862. It was owing to Mr. Leviu's explanations that I withdrew the expressions I had made use of against him. After seeing the accounts in Wellington I told him I would write to him giving my reasons for being dissatisfied with him. R«-exanrined : I made an agreement in January, 1865, to lend the money to Tetley. I considered any man bound by his word of honor to acklowledge a verbal agreement. I have seen plaintiff's accounts with Tetley, and cannot fiud any entry showing that Tetley had the money before March. Mr. Tetley never consulted me on business matters uutil lately. I never had auy conversation with Tetley relative to the sheep mentioned in my letter of March. Ingles has asked me to withdraw my slanders against Levin as I was bound to lose the case. When I made myself liable to the bank I expected Tetley back. I found Tetley's account from 1865 in a box at Kekerangu, but I did not discover when his account first commenced until I inspected the books in Levin's office. Henry Wharton : I arrived in New Zealand in 1865 with Tetley. I was then underage. I knew Tetley in England; he was at my mother's house, where he advised her to write to plaintiff. I never saw plaintiff before I arrived in New Zealand. About four days after we landed Beaumont, Garforth, and I, went to Levitt's office, where we met Tetley, who asked me if I had my letter. I produced it, and Tetley and Levin took it into the private office. After a few minutes they came out again together. Tetley said "Mr. Levin does not at all like the responsibility of advising young men, but out of personal , regard to myself he will do so on this

occasion." We then had a conversation, ' the substance of which was that we were to lend our money to Tetley until some suitable investment offered. .An arrangement was eventually made that we were to lend the money to Tetley at 12J per cent, for two years, unless some very desirable investment turned up. Tetley explained it as an investment in sheep. I then signed some paper, I am not sure what it was, but I think it was a draft on my mother for £1000. We never received either sheep or security. I was in Wellington in 1866, where I metplaintiff, who asked me whether I was likely to get any more money from my friends. I replied I . thought I should, when he said "you will be getting a good stake in the country." I have received interest from Tetley. I have never been repaid any of the money I lent to Tetley. I lost altogether £2500. Cross-examined : I never put my name to a bill in England. I might have known one when I saw it. I bad never been in any business. I was about six months under age when I arrived here. I wrote to my mother for a second £1000, telling her that I had sheep on terms with Tetley. I remember that £1200 was to be set aside for our Kaikoura property, each of us paying £400, but I was not aware | that Beaumont's money was all gone at that time. I was drawing at that time from Tetley interest on £1,600. At first I received £200 a year and then £160. Sometime afterwards we entered into partnership with Tetley and the arrangement was that our investment should be absorbed in this partnership. We ceased to receive interest on the sheep investment a few months before Tetley left. Re-examined : I wrote home about my investment at Tetley's request, and I am certain he saw my letter. The words "sheep ou terms" were dictates by him. I never had any document to show we had sheep on terms, but only Mr. Tetley's word. When we wanted money we applied" to him for it. By the Court : Tetley told us it did not matter about the price of sheep when they were taken on terms. We never had any understanding with him as to how we were to be paid except (hat the interest should be paid half-yearly. Nothing was said about increase or wool money. Frederick Arthur Pulleine. I first knew Tetley in 1864. I met him in Yorkshire, where he was looked upon as a man who had made money iv New Zealand. Shortly after arriving in Wellington I went with him to Levin's office. Tetley said " This is Mr. Pulleine whom I spoke to you , about." I showed my letters to Levin, when he said " lend your money to Mr. Tetley." I had been told by my father to place implicit confidence in Levin and Tetley; this I did throughout the whole transaction. There was very little conversation between us, and nothing was said about sheep. My father had known Tetley for some years. I signed my first bill of exchange at Kekerangu. I signed three altogether. I came of age on the passage out. I had never been in auy business, but was what was termed a "mud student" at home, that was, I was learning farming. Tetley never showed me any sheep as belonging to me. He said that he would write all particulars to my father. He was to give me 12-| per cent. I was not engaged in the management of the station. I was merely gaining colonial experience. Iv 1868 I with others signed a deed of partnership with Tetley. I have never seen any of my money since. I put £2,300 into the partnership. I went to Canterbury in 1866, where I bought some horses. On my return I saw Levin in Wellington and told him. I was surprised at his refusiug to cash my order for £100. He told me he had no funds, In the same envelope with the order I had sent was a letter from Tetley. Cross-exfimined : In addition to the £2,300 I had about £700 invested in the Awatere. I don't remember anything being said to me at Kekerangu by Tetley with ..reference to the sheep investment. All I know was that my money came out somehow or other, and that I received my interest. I knew nothing of the arrangements made for the disposition of my money. This closed the case for the defence, when the Attorney General re-called Nathaniel Levin, who stated : I have heard what Beaumont said wifchjefereuce to our meeting in Picton. A portion of what he said was true, but only a portion. When Tetley commenced his connection with , me he paid me £1000. I heard

what Beaumont said. yesterday about inspecting the accounts iv 1867. I said I i hoped he was satisfied with them. I have no recollection of his saying that he would! expose such transactions in order to let people know that they. could not be done with impunity. He never said anything about fitting Tetley out as a privateer. At my office, during the interview between Tetley, Beaumont, and others, and myself, there was no price named for sheep. Nothing of the kind that Beaumont has stated occurred. I never had any oral communication with Mr. Tetley on this subject. I received a letter from him about it on 2nd March, 1865. Cross-examined: 1 still adhere to what I said, that I have no recollection of any business communication with Wharton or Pulleine at my office when they first arrived. By a juror: In January, 1865, Tetley owed me £14,400. I believe at that time he was leasing 9000 sheep and 28,000 acres of land from Major Richmond; 8000 sheep and 18,000 acres from Mr. Trolove; 9000 acres freehold and 10,000 acres under license, and 7100 sheep of his run at Kekera'ugu. I considered him to be perfectly safe, or I should have stopped his credit. Heury Ingles ; I came out in- 1862, In January 1865, I saw Beaumont in Wellington, and shortly afterwerds at my own house at Knikoura. He told me he had dined with Mr. Levin at Wellington, and after dinner had had a long yarn with hin, when Levin told him the best thino 1 he could do was to invest his money in, sheep. In April 1864 I spoke to him about a letter he had written to Levin, and advised him to drop the affair. He said he had never had sheep on terms with Tetley, and I asked him whether he did not remember telling me when first he came to Kaikoura, that he had sheep on terms with Tetley. He said he did not recollect it. Cross-examined : I was first spoken to about giving evidence in this case by Levien at Kekeraniru. I purchased sheep from Tetley in 1868. We gave bills for them. The first bill was reuewed and the second one became due just about the time Levien came to Kekeraugu. I had no business transactions with Levin before, but he then advanced me £700 on the security of bills signed by our firm. He had offered to do this before, but we had refused. W. H. Eyes : I heard Beaumont's examination yesterday. I heard him say I commenced the conversation by referring to his letter of apology. This I deny as I knew nothing of it until he told me. I feel confident he mentioned to me that he had invested in sheep with Tetley. A. de B. Brandon: I was acting as solicitor for plaintiff in 1862, I had been doing so for some time and am still. I remember Tetley's mortgage ot 1862. It was executed because he was going home. I received no instructions from plaintiff not to register it. William Levin: I am a member of the firm of Pharazyn, Johnson, and Levin. I remember when Beaumont came to examine Tetley's accounts in January last. While I was in the room Beaument never said anything about my father fitting Tetley out asa privateer; nor did he say anything about being dissatisfied with the accounts, nor threaten any proceedings against my father. Cross-examined : I do not recollect ever having said to Beaumont that it was unfair of him to blame ray father for" having given unfortunate advice. He never said that he considered my father morally if not legally responsible for the looses he had sustained through Tetley. Arthur Seymour : I know the Kekerangu Statiou. Unimproved freehold land in 1865, in that neighbourhood was worth £1 per acre. Land held under license from the Crown I should have valued at £100 per 1000 acres. Sheep would have been worth one pound per head for a mixed flocks Hugh Stafford: I knew the Kekeranga run in 1865. Large improvements had been made on it. The freehold land was worth £1 and the leasehold 3s. per acre. A mixed lot of ewes were worth 225. per head. I should think the improvements ! were worth £3000. This closed the evidence, and Mr. Conolly was addressing the jury for the defence when we went to press.

Gold. — The Lady Barkly brought 150 ounces gold from Golden Bay yesterday. Curaous Incident. — In January, 1862, the barque Lady Flora Hastings, Captain German, belonging to Mr. J. Wilson, Billiter-street, London, from Moulmien, bound to Falmouth, with teak timber, foundered in a cyclone, 1300 miles to the eastward of the Mauritius. The crew of the ill-fated ship were on the foremast for five days and nights, were taken off by the French ship Leoni and landed in the Mauritius. The desk (the only relic of the vessel ever since seen) of the Chief Officer, Mr. H. Hall, now of Nelson, was picked, up by the American ship Samuel Russell, after floating about nine weeks, taken to New York, and then sent to his friends in London, who forwarded it to him by the barque Hera, just arrived. It contains family portraits and letters in a very fair state of preservation.