LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXV, Issue 9130, 11 August 1888, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

SUPREME COURT.—Civil Sittings. Friday. [Before His Honor Mr. Justice Gillies.] \Viiitson and Co. (Louis Ehrenfried) v. Patrick Gleksox.—This was an action for specific performance and for writ of injunction. The case arising out of a covenant for purchase and supply of beer, etc., by the defendant from the plaintiff. Mr. Theo. Cooper and Mr. Cotter appeared for the plaintiff, and Messrs. Button and Hesketh for the defence. The case had been argued at an earlier sitting of the Court, and His Honor now gave judgment as follows: —After a careful consideration of the deed in question in this case I feel bound to come to the conclusion that, from the internal evidence of the deed alone, the true meaning and intention of the parties was that the defendant should sell, and the plaintiff would buy, the exclusive right of supplying the various licensed houses named in the deed with liquors during the terra therein mentioned, whoever might be the tenants or occupants of these houses. The deed, which is ill-drawn arid verbose, fails to provide in specific terms for various contingencies which, like the present, might possibly occur. But these which are provided for, as well as the general tenor of the deed, point unmistakably to the conclusion that what the defendant sold and the plaintiff bought was the exclusive right under certain conditions of supplying the houses mentioned with liquor, whoever might be the tenants or occupants. The clause providing for the event of a tenancy lapsing, and providing for a succeeding tenant being bound, implies, to my mind, taken in connection with our licensing laws, a contemplation that there should be no interval between a lapsing and a new tenancy, and that therefore if the defendant chose to go into occupation himself during such a hiatus, he must be treated as a new tenant, and be bound by the covenants, which, if he had put a new tenant into occupation at once, that tenant would have been bound by. As there is, however, a defence pleaded that plaintiff refused to supply liquors of good quality at the market price thereof, evidence must be taken on that point. Mr. Cooper said there was no question as to quality, the only evidence was with regard to price. He called the plaintiff, but Mr. Button said they had come to the conclusion not to press this question. His Honor then gave judgment in terms of the statement of claim, that defendant had covenanted to purchase beer, stout, cigars, &c., from the plaintiff, and that the defendant should render an account of what beer, stout, etc., which he had purchased from others than the plaintiff and vended while in occupancy of the defendant, and of the profit which plaintiff would have made out of the sale of a like quantity of liquors, etc., and that defendant be ordered to pay to the plaintiff the amount of such loss of profit. The minutes of the decree and the amount of costs are to be settled in chambers. Judge's Chambers. Probate. —Probate was granted in the will of George Storey, deceased. Administration". —Letters of administration were granted in the estate of John Browne, deceased.

Land Transfer Act.—Mr. Cotter moved for a summons to the District Land Registrar to uphold objections to register. Mr. Cotter appeared for tho District Land Registrar, and pointed out that a very nice question was involved. The validity of a deed was in question, and it was hardly a Chamber question. The trustee should be made a party, and the argument taken in Banco. .Mr. Stone did not object, but submitted that if the trustee was brought before the Court it should bo on his motion. The application was adjourned to the Banco sitting of the Court, and the trustee to be brought before the Court.

Farmers' Co-operative Association. — Mr. Button moved for summons to proceed with the winding up of the company. Mr. Hesket.li, on behalf of Mr. Button, applied to have this application further adjourned till next sitting' in chambers, and said that all parties consented. The adjournment was granted. .John Burke.—Mr. Mahony moved to set aside the order of the Registrar of the Supreme Court at New Plymouth. Mr. Brookfield appeared for the Public Trustee. The order vested the property of deceased in the Public Trustee, and Mr. Brookfield said that the Public Trustee was perfectly willing that the order should be rescinded, but he submitted that the Public Trustee, being a public otlicer, should not be saddled with costs. Mr. Mahony entered into a very lengthy explanation of the proceedings, reading numerous affidavits. It appeared that there were at first two trustees for the estate, but they renounced their trusteeship in order that it might be placed in the Public Trust Office, and subsequently one of them, regretting his renunciation, sought to withdraw it, and resume his trusteeship. His Honor asked what status this man had ? lie had renounced his trusteeship by deed. Mr. Mahony contended that he had power to withdraw his renunciation, and quoted authorities in support of his contention, but His Honor held that his renunciation being by solemn deed, the retractation should be by some instrument of equal weight, and in this case there was 110 such instrument. He thought, looking at all the affidavits, it was clear that it would be better for the estate that it should be administered by the Public Trustee than by this man. No order was made, but power was granted to the Public Trustee to apply to have it amended, as there was a verbal mistake in it. Mr. Brookfield applied for costs, and it was ordered that they be paid out of the estate.

Paul Stkaka v. Puhoi Road Board.— Mr. Cooper moved for directions as to time and place of hearing this compensation claim. The matter was allowed to stand over till Tuesday. Mackkohnie and another v. YVaitkmata Council and another.—Mr. Campbell moved for summons to set aside statement of claim. Mr. Cooper applied to have the question stand over until Tuesday, as there was a cross summons. The adjournment was granted.

Rationalist Newspaper Company.— Mr. Mahony moved on summons to strike a call of 4s per share. Mr. E. Hesketh appeared for the Nelson shareholders, and by consent, the application was postponed until Tuesday, as the whole question in regard to these shareholders and their liability would be re-opened. Dr. Laishley also appeared for the Masterton contingent of nine contributories, whose objections were the same as those of the Nelson people.

R.M. COURT.—Friday. [Before Dr. Giles, R.M.I

Judgment Summonses.—The following judgment summonses were disposed of:— A. Masy v. A. Henderson : Claim, £11 12s; payment was ordered by instalments of £4 per month. George Thomas v. Thomas Reed : Claim, £20 Ids; there was no appearance of plaintiff, and the case was struck out. G. Bailey v. J. Kellett: Claim, £2 7s Gd ; defendant gave evidence, and His Worship did not make an order. W. R. Franklin v. Pepa Teneroa: Claim, £3 18s ; defendant by consent was ordered to pay 10s a month. Undefended Case.— J. Ware v. Jones : Claim, 9s 6d. Defendant did not appear, and judgment was given for the plaintiff for Bs. G. F. Kelly v. G. Herbert.Claim, £13 16s, for rent of premises at Mount Eden. Mr. Beale appeared for the plaintiff, for whom judgment was given for £12 13s, costs £2 2s.

POLICE COURT.—Friday. [Before Mr. S. Y. Collins, J.P.]

Drunkenness.—There were six cases of drunkenness before the Court, and each offender was lined 5s and costs, or 24: hours' imprisonment with hard labour. [Before Messrs. Collins and Ehrenfried, J.P.'s.] Larceny. — Lawrence McDonald was charged with stealing a lady's woollen petticoat, valued at 3s lid, the property of Mr. Jas. R. Cross, ladies' emporium, corner of Victoria and Albert streets, on August 9. The prisoner pleaded guilty. Inspector Broham conducted the case on behalf of the police, and called Charles Richardson, who stated tho facts in the case. The witness said he resided in Chapel-street. On Thursday afternoon, aboutaquarter-past five o'clock, he walked along Albert-street towards Victoria-street. Witness saw the accused go to the shop of Mr. Cross, corner of Victoria and Albert streets, and first unhook the petticoat off the nail and drop

it on the ground. Witness then turned his back to prisoner, who first moved away a little distance, and then returned, and picking up the petticoat hid it under his coat. Witness went and told Mrs. Cross, who requested him to give the prisoner in charge. Witness followed prisoner, and caugTit him, whereupon he asked witness to take the petticoat, and he would pay three times its cost if the witness would let him go. Witness replied he would not, end such men as the prisoner should be made examples of. Witness followed prisoner, and meeting Constable Graham gave prisoner in charge. The Bench _ sentenced the prisoner to six months' imprisonment with hard labour.