RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XXII, Issue 11, 22 May 1888, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before A, T»Fnbi}ll Esq., R.M.) Qriffin and Son v. W. Close— Claim for £2 B_. Judgment for amount and costs 16a. The Same. v. E. Fuller.-— Olaim for £5 17a _d. Judgment for amount and oosts 10a. The Sau.ev. R. Bright.— Claim for £2 15s 4d. Judgment for amount and oosts 6b. Blancltett v. Close.— Claim for £5, interest due. Judgment for amount and costs 15s. Tregea v. W. Meads junr.— Olaim for £2 18a, balance due on promissory note. Judgment for amount and oosta £1 16 6d. Mr Pitt appeared for the plaintiff. Child v. Goss. — Claim for £1 8a for rent of a cottage. Ja.gmeat for amount and cos's 6s. National Bank v. John Kerr.— Thh waß an action brought: under the terras of a guarantee given by the defendant in favor of the National Bunk to cover the indebtedness of G-. B, Vause & Sen to the Bank to aoy amount not exoeeding £100. Mr Fell appeared for tbe plaintiffs, and Mr 0. Harky for tbe defendant. The «videnoe of Mr W, Blaok, reoently managor of tbe Baok, had been taken afc Obri-tctiurob, and .o a portion of this Mr Harley to. k exception ne b_ing inadmissible, being a report of wh.t th* w_.bu.fs had written to his employers und said to Vause, tho defendant net b ing j present^ ifr Fell had no doubt thei 'he j Court w. g quite capable of using i's judgment as to what or was not ad mi; Bible. Tbe evidence ef William Black, recently Manager of the Bank at Nolsjn, wa9 to tbe following eff ct:— Tba. he hrd reoeived Kerr's guara tee for Vau-e's overdraft to the extent of £100 in December, 1882. Lightband k Co. bad given a guarantee for a simil.r amount, and in Marcb, J.Bss ( he (witness) reported that the two guarantors were undoubted. The limit of the two guarantees wag £200, and the overdraft was then -5197. Ile reported similarly in September,. 1885, when Ike overdraft was £183, and tbis woald i ob have beea allowed by the B.nk without the guarantees. He had no recollection of aoy alteration of Kerr's guarantee by withdrawal. At ono time be -had an interview with K.rr and Vause. Kerr told Vausa __• would withdraw his guarantee, but he (witne s) w?s ■ilent on tha matter, Ho bad no deflnita notice of withdrawal. Alexander Hamilton: I am manager of the plaintiff Company's Bank in Nelson, and have been since 1885. In Deoember, 1882, tho date of the guarantee, Vause & Son's acoount stood in credit £27. From that date it began £Q jjhow a debit, whioh gradually increased. In itasch, JBBS, it was £197. When I took charge in November, 1882, it was about £190, and whea Vause failed in September last year it was £200 7s, for which amount I held a guarantee from Kerr for £100, and another from Lightband for a similar amount. ( Lightband paid the money. I am still in possession of his guarantee, which is in exactly similar tejjiqs to Kerrs, Mr Kerr declined to pay, and told, me he thought he oould produce cvi- I dence to show that he had withdrawn his j guarantee. The account was frequently overdrawn to the extent of nearly £200. ; The account is ab present overdrawn £100 7s. | Crors-examined : More than £200 has been paid in and drawn out again since I took charg-*, Ttat is what, a banking account is for. I don't think Mr Kerr had been noi lied at anytime that the acoount was overdrawn. Lightband'a guarantee, wbioh w-a for the same amout t bb Kerr's, has been pad. O.rtaio returns were sent to Mr Black at the time be gave his evidence at Ohristohurch. The letter books were not sent to him. Arthur Achton Scaife : »1 am Deputy Official Assignee. I produc* Van.c end Son's statement on becoming bankrupt, j^.t the first meeting of or- ditors Mr Vause said Mr J. Kerr guarante. d £100. His guarantee was etill in Tore 3 . He hod sold goods of K n's but had oharged no commission as Kerr was guarantee for hioa at tbe Bank. This was the oase for the plaintiff. For tbe defence Mr Harley called John Kerr : In Deoember, 1882, I gave a guarantee to the National Bank to secure Vau.e'g overdraft co the extent of £100. From six to twelve months afterwards I went and saw the manager of the Bank, and told him I had come with the intention of withdrawing the guarantee. He said '' What does Vause say to it ?" and I replied ''I will go and fetoh Vause," whioh I did, and told the manager in his presence that I should withdraw the guarantee. The Manager said to Vause " What do you 0&y to that ?" to whioh he replied that he would p&y the money as it came in. The Manager then turned to me and said "Very well, Mr Kerr, so far as yon are concerned that's all right ' He produced the guarantee and I believe I could have brought it away if I chose. I never heard any more about it until the bankruptcy when the present fljacagor asked we if I &w he beld my

guarantee for *100. I said "No I don't and I don't believe you do." I never intended the guarantee to hold good for more than a twelvemonth. Cross examined: I -have no acknowledgement of the withdrawal. If ifc is the case thafc I am still liable, I am so for others as well, as they hold other guarantees of mine which I have not brought away. I believe Mr Black understood that I had withdrawn it. Vause sold a lot of harness for me, but I don't know whether I ever paid him anything for his trouble. We had .business transactions and I gave him oredit for taking what was due to him. Vause had a lot of my harness for sale, and he told mo that he was a good deal bothered abont his account and said if I would guarantee his overdraft for a year he thought by the time he sold my harness he would be over his trouble. I agreed to do so. I never knew that he was trading on my guarantee up to the time of his bankruptcy. Reexamined: I went to the Manager in a straightforward way and told him I withdrew my guarantee and he told me I was all right and was out of ifc altogether. J. B. Vause : My overdraft at the National Bank was guaranteed in 1882 by Mr Kerr. I remember his coming to me about twelvemonths after he had given it. He told me he wanted me at the Bank, and I ! went, and he told the Manager that he gave 1 noti.e that he withdrew his guarantee. Mr f Blaok asked me if I was prepared to meet it, I and I said No, I could nofc pay it at once, I but would do so in instalments. Mr Black j then said to Mr Kerr : " Very well_Mr Kerr I that will be all right." There was no j understanding with Mr Black how the j money I paid in was to be applied. It cvi - j dently was not devoted to reducing the overdraft. I understood that Mr Black was satisfied with Mr Kerr's withdrawal, and that he would acoept my payments towards reduoing the overdraft. I have paid in considerably over £100 since then. Cross, examined : I left Mr Black and Mr Kerr together in the Bank, and I understood that I was liable for £100. I understood I that when I had paid .3100 Kerr was to be I free from his liability. I understood that 1 Mr Kerr was free from the date of our interview. I can't say whether thef Bank undertook not to hold Kerr responsible. I remember a conversation I had with Mr Hamilton. _ I told him 1 knew the amount was not paid. I told him I had gone with Kerr when he said he proposed to withdraw the guarantee, but did not know what took place afterwards between Kerr and Black. I suppose that from that Mr Hamilton ' inferred that I believed the guarantee was | still in force. Afc the time of my bankruptcy I treated the guarantees of Mr Kerr and Mr Lightband as° debts to them. I omitted then to tell Mr Scaife about the interview between Kerr and fche manager. I credited Kerr with £80, as I had a debit against him for £20, the £80 being the balance of the £100 guarantee. I have treated that guarantee as in full force ever sinoe. Mr Kerr never spoke to me about it until after my misfortune. I undertook the _>ale of a lot of harness Kerr brought down from America. I never charged anything for commission, as I considered the accommodation I had received frpm him was a set-oft* against the commission. Counsel having addressed the Bench, judgment was given for the amount claimed and costs £0 17s 6d.