LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9013, 28 March 1888, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

SUPREME COURT.— Chambers.

Tuesday. [Before His Honor Mr. Justice Gillies.]

Probate.—Probate was granted in the wills of the following deceased persons :—Geo. Robert Turner, Mary Mahyon, Win. Routley, Martin Messhausen, Wm. Kerr, Joseph Tyco Gillibrand, M. A. Pritchard, Edward Thos. Wildman, Donald Campbell, Henry Grover, Isabella Lewis, Jas. Wm. Gossett, James Leach, Daniel Sullivan, Wenzl Bayer, Joseph Lilly, Nathaniel Cameron Gow, and Robert Browning. Administration.—Letters of administration were granted in the estates of the following persons, deceased :—Collings da Jersey Gout, Edward Hodgkins, Chas. Court Fox, Stansfield Reynolds, Elizabeth O'Neill, Joseph Boulter, Francis Kneebone, Sarah Trafford, John Herbert Burns, and Neil McPhee. An application for letters of administration in the estate of Arthur Stone was ordered to stand over for the tiling of a further affidavit.

Revocation of Probate.—Mr. Buddie moved for an order revoking probata ranted 25th October, 1886, and that proate of the will and testament of Robert Wilson, deceased, dated in the month of July, 1884, be granted to the widow of deceased. An order was granted revoking the former probate, and granting probata as prayed in the will of 1884. Admission to the Bar.On the motion of Mr. J. B. Russell, Mr. Wm. Cooper was admitted a barrister and solicitor of the Supreme Court of New Zealand. KjEr and Hansen v. Hawkks.—Mr. Napier moved for a refund to the plaintiffs solicitor of 15s, Court fees paid for issue of a writ of sale herein. It appears the writ had never been issued, as the amount had been paid before it was possible to issue it, owing to the absence of the sheriff, who went South without appointing a substitute. His Honor said the matter was out of the hands of the Court, the money being in the hands of the Government, and the stamps were cancelled. Mr. Cooper said he appeared on the other side in that case, and he firmly believed that the 15s had been paid to Messrs. Napier and Shera.

COMPTON V. COMPTON (DIVORCE). —Ml', Theo. Cooper moved for direction as to the time and place for trial in this suit. .His Honor decided to set it down for tri'al at) the next ensuing civil sittings, to be tried . without a jury. Wratt v. Wratt (Divorce). This was a similar application by Mr. James RusselL There was no appearance for fjie respondent or co-respondent. Ordered to be tried by the Court without a jury at the next ensuing civil sittings. Rating Act. —In the matter of the Rating Act, 1882, and of. allotment 180, - in the Parish of Taupiri, Mr. Clayton (for Mr. Hesketh) moved for a summons to tho Public Trustee, to show cause why an order should not be made for.- payment out of the Public Trust Office to Archibald Clements of ±'(i os. The summons had been served on the Public Trustee, and he consented. The order was made accordingly. Tantox v. Mutual Life Association op Australasia.—Mr. James Russell moved for a summons to show cause why a commission should not issue for taking evidence in Dunedin. The order was granted.

DISTRICT COURT.—Tuesday. [Before His Honor Judge Smith.] J. Darby v. Dignan.—Claim, £3 14s, nonsuit costs. An order was made, at the instance of Mr. Clayton, that the amount) be paid forthwith, or, in default, that defendant undergo seven days' imprisonment. [With a jury of four.] T. Hawke v. T. Hunt and Wife.Claim, £99, damages for alleged ill-treatment of cattle impounded by the defendants. Messrs. Tylden and Palmer appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Earl for the defendants. This case was partly heard at a previous sitting of the Court. An argument) ensued between counsel as to whether, the cattle having been properly impounded by them, the defendants could be held liable for damages resulting from the impounding, but His Honor ruled that there would be a ground for damages if it were proved that the Act had not been fully complied with. The present action was, however, for trespass, and if the defendants proved that the cattle were properly taken, they would nob be liable. Evidence for the defence was given by Mrs. Hunt, Timothy Hunt, Mrs. Adelaide Marshall, and Charles Marshall, who were examined at great length. The hearing of the case did not) terminate until five minutes to nine p.m., when the jury, after a short deliberation, returned a verdict for the plaintiff for £25 Is, with costs. Mr. Earl asked His Honor to reserve judgment, as he (the counsel), wished to raised points of law to show that the verdict would not hold good. His Honor said he would hear the arguments on Thursday afternoon, and judgment was reserved accordingly.