LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9014, 29 March 1888, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

SUPREME COURT.—IN BANCO. Wednksday. [Before His Honor Mr. Justice Gillies.) Gray v. Anderson.— This was a special case for argument. Mr. Napier appeared i for tho plaintiff and Mr. Button for defen- ! dant. This action was instituted in July i last. The plaintiff in the action was a I captain in the employ of the Tonga j Government, and purchased a barque named ' the Rebecca, which was wrecked at Nukua- ! lofa. He temporarily repaired the vessel, j and sailed her to Auckland, and handed her ; over to Captain H. F. Anderson, of Auck- 1 land, to have her repaired and subsequently : sold, giving him a bill of sale over her as j security, and the action was to recover the proceeds of the sale of the vessel. The | matter really turned on the construction of j one letter, so it was agreed to arrange a special case for argument. If the case was decided in favour of the defendant, then application would be made that accounts | be made between the parties, so as to j ascertain what was due to the plaintiff. The • case set down for argument was in effect as follows: The plaintiff purchased the vessel at Tonga, which he temporarily repaired and brought to Auckland, and arranged with the defendant for the repairs and sale of the vessel, and to make advances for such purposes, the balance to be paid to tho plaintiff. At the plaintiff's request the defendant gave him a letter containing the terms between them. Defendant by this letter undertook to pay off a mortgage of £100 due to the Tongan Government, to make advances for payment of the crew and repairs of tho vessel—the advances not to exceed £800 —in consideration of the plaintiff transferring to him his interest in the vessel. Plaintiff then returned to Tonga, leaving to defendant the management of the vessel, and defendant found it necessary to make advances beyond that limit, amounting in all to £1300. He sent the account to the plaintiff, who wrote expressing surprise that the sum was so largo, and informing him that he had written to Messrs. Jackson and Russell. Mr. Anderson waited on Messrs. Jackson and Russell, who showed him a letter from Captain Gray, in which they were instructed to dispose of the vessel, and obtain accounts from Captain Anderson, as well as full information as to the movements of the vessel. Meanwhile the vessel had been sent to Sydney, and before Messrs. Jackson and Russell's instructions could be given effect to, she was sold by defendant for £1350. The question for the Court was, whether the defendant was entitled to deduct from the proceeds of the sale more than £800, that being the limit of tho advance to be made, or whether he was entitled to deduct the full amount of his advances. For the plaintiff it was argued that the defendant was not authorised to exceed £800, the original estimate ; and for the defendant it was argued that although he had fixed a limit at £800, which he was not obliged to exceed, still he had full power to exceed that limit if lie found it necessary. His Honor said that, taking the letter alone without reference to the subsequent ones, in a commercial sense it amounted to this : Not that he contracted to repair the vessel and pay other charges for £800, as was contended by the plaintiff; it was a mere statement on behalf of the defendant that he would make certain advances necessary, but that he was not bound to advance more than £800. That was the commercial view of the matter, and this was made plain by the subsequent letters. There had been no contract, merely an estimate. Defendant was not bound to advance more than £800, but finding that further advances were necessary, he had advanced above that amount. Tho judgment of the Court was .therefore an answer in the affirmative to the question asked in the special case ; that is to say, judgment for the defendant with , leave to apply for further direction. Costs, £15 15s, were allowed. Rhodes v. Kerb.—Mr. Hesketh moved for a new trial in this case. By arrangement it was agreed that this case should stand over till after Easter. POLICE COURT.— Wednesday. [Before 11. C. Baddeley, Esq., R.M.] DKnM<ENNP.ss. —Blind Bob,-the fiddler was charged with being drunk. He pleaded not guilty. Case remanded till to-morrow.

Drunk and Disorderly.—Wm. O'Brien was charged with being drunk and disorderly in the Greyhound Hotel. Constable Martin proved the offence. He was fined 40s and costs, or fourteen days' hard labour.

City - By-laws.Alfred Edward Fenton, draper, was charged with affixing an advertising screen on his premises contrary to the provisions of the by-laws. Mr. O'Meagher appeared for defendant, and said Mr. Fenton had only recently commenced business in Auckland, and was unaware of the existence of the by-law. When he received notice from the Town Clerk he took the signs and screens down in accordance with the terms of the notice. A nominal fine of Is and costs 13s was imposed. Unregistered Bicycle.Moncrieff McCallum was charged with having his bicycle unregistered, contrary to the provisions of the by-law in that case made and provided. Mr. Theo. Cooper appeared for the defendant, and stated that he had looked into the case, and now felt satisfied that the by-law was duly made. Defendant had registered his bicycle immediately he had been informed of the existence of the by-law, which had only recently been made, and of the existence of which very few persons were aware. The Town Clerk had suggested that under the circumstances the information should be withdrawn. Sergeant Pratt, after some observations from the Bench, consented to withdraw the charge, as the prosecution would call the attention of bicyclists to the necessity of conforming to the law.