LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XIV, Issue 5023, 21 December 1877, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

BANKRUPTCY. Re Meredith Eountrek, Master Marinkr.—A meeting of creditois was held yesterday in this estata. The liabilities were set down at £185 103 lid; assets, nil. Mr. Thomas Macffarlane was appointed trustee to get iu the estate. RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.— Thursday. [Before R. 0. liirstow, Esq., B.M.] The ordinary rreekly sitting for hearing and determining small debt claims was held this morning, and the following business disposed of : — UIfDEFESDED C.ASES (JDDOMEXT TOKPLAIKtiffs). —John Van Breda v. Amelius M. Smith, claim,£GC3; C. DeL'Raur. Charles Mack, £9 ISs ; Edmund Culbert v. John Eahey, £2 lGs 9d ; Mathew Kitt v. Michael Grace, £15 3s ; Edward Boucher v. John Mulhilly, £7 2s 9d; George Fowler v. Robert Atkinson, 17s 9d; Mary Cashel v. Henry Colson, £4 7s Cd ; Joseph Hall v. Thomas Dye, £2 Gs 4d ; Long Tunnel Li.M.Co. v. James Nelson (calls), £16 lis 3d.

Thomas Weir v. George Mackay.— Claim, £100. Mr. Hesketh appeared for plaintiff. This was a proceeding to take the evidence of a witness (Cx. YV\ Binney) for transmission to the Court at Lyttelton. The claim, was for goods. The defendant consigned the goods, per a vessel called the Wave of Life, to Mr. Binney, auctioneer, upon sale or roturn. Mr. Binney sold the goods, aud the plaintiff asked him for information respecting the proceeds according to the account sales. Mr. Binney declined to give the information asked on the ground that the only person he knew iu the transaction was Mackay, the defendant. Hence his being summoned to give evidence. Mr. Binuey deposed that among the goods were twenty sacks of flour, amounting in weight to two tons. This he sold at the rate of £14 a ton. After deducting ship's charges, wharf charges, commission, &c., the neb proceeds amounted to £23 12s Gd. Ho had not remitted this amount to Mackay; nor was he indebted to Mackay, for Mackay drew against the whole of the goods, to the crtent of £SO, when making the shipment. The result showed that Mackay overdrew, and witness had to re-draw against Mackay. The /lour was very bad. This was all the evidence. His Worship in the course of the proceedings said that in all cases where evidence was taken for transmission to another Court, it would be desirablo if tiie Miuister of Justice would direct that a copy of the plaint should bo sent to the Court where the evidence is to bo taken. In effect, by the absence of any plaint, the Court is wholly ignorant of the nature !of tho proceeding, and in such a case could not know whether the testimony offered were evidence ii*. the cause or not. Mr. Hesketh pointed to- a case where, in consequence of the Court being wholly in tho dark in a case of this kind, it was possible for a witness to come into Court to utter a series of libels against the other side, to which the party libelled would have to listen whtn the evidence went to its destination. —This concluded the business.