DISTRICT COURT.—Monday.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XVIII, Issue 6065, 26 April 1881, Page 6

DISTRICT COURT.—Monday.

[Before Ufa Honor F. D. Fenton, Judge.] Thomas Ellisox v. Adah Elliott.—This was a claim for £25 19s on a judgment summons. Mr. Theopbilus Copper, for the complainant, asked for an adjournment, as he understood that the defendant wished to put in a defence. Adjourned to the 9th of May. SOMERFIELD AND LECK V. William English.—The claim was £59 6s 10d, amount of a judgment summons. Mr. Lusk appeared for the judgment creditor, and Mr. Theophilus Cooper for the judgment debtor, who lived 150 miles away, and was unable to attend. He forwarded an affidavit, setting out that he had not means to satisfy the judgment, and that be bad not had since the judgment was obtained. The goods had been obtained not by himself, but by a former partner of his. Hβ did hot appear to defend the ease, as he understood the plaintiffs accepted the promise to pay of Rushton, the partner referred to, and besides he could not leave his business. His Honor asked whether there could be greater contempt than not appearing to be examined. Mr. Cooper said that no conduct money had been tendered to him, and he had not the means to attend. Mr. Lnsk called Pi ederick James Somerfield, one of the judgment creditors. He knew the debtor, Mr. English. At the time he got the goods he was a storekeeper at Opotiki, and at present he believed he was a hotelkeeper. He thought he had had means to pay since the judgment, for in February, two months after the judgment, he filed an affidavit of a bill of sale, in which he acknowledged receipt of £500. He believed he was now doing a good business. The goods were supplied to Mr. English. Witness had received no part of the judgment debt. Cross-examined :He had heard that a house belonging to Mr. English had been burnt, but did not know what it contained. He did not know whether Mr. English was simply managing the hotel or running it for himself. His Honor thought he should attend for examination. In that case Mr. Cooper asked to have the case adjourned for a month, to enable the debtor to appear. Adjourned to the 23rd May. His Honor said he could make no order about conduct-money, as there was nothing about it in the Act.

James Wallace v. William Cooper.— This was a claim for £50 for rent. Mr Lusk appeared for the plaintiff. Defendant did not appear. The service of the summons was proved. Mr. Wallace proved the debt and judgment passed for tho amount of the claim, and costs £4 16s.

Cases Adjouenkd.—The following defended cases were adjourned :—James Niccol v. Archibald Cochrane, £23 9s lid, goods cash, &c, adjourned to 23rd of May ; John Lamb v. Benjamin Boon, £50, damages, adjourned to 9th of May ; G. W. Owen and Co. x. Edward Bartley, £57, amount of a cheque, adjourned to 23rd May ; John Cash v. Maurice Kelly, sen., £60i damages, ad-

journed to 9th May : Robert W. Johnstone (by his next friend George Johnstone) v. John Smith, £100, damages, adjourned to the 23rd of May.