LAW AND POLICE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVII, Issue 8305, 11 July 1890, Page 3

LAW AND POLICE.

SUPREME COURT.—Civil Sittings. Thursday. [Before His Honor Mr. Juatico Conolly.J Ehrenfried v. Gleeson.— Claim, to have accounts taken respecting the Albion Hotol. Tho hearing of this action was resumed. Archibald Fleming (of tho Panmure Hotel), G. I. Piinter (of the Waverley Hotel), G. B. Martin (Pacific Hotel), Chas. Sutton (malster), and Henry Maiden (Royal Mail Hotel), gave evidence as to the market price of beer. Mr. Thomas Cotter, solicitor, deposed that in 1888 he was solicitor for plaintiff in the action Ehrenfried v. Gleeson. On Friday, tho 29th of June, two days prior to the date fixed for the action, Mr. Ehrenfried, Mr. Gleeson, and Mr. Meyers camo to his office at four o'clock in the afternoon. Nothing was said at any time during' the conversation about its being privileged, or without prejudice. He understood a settlement was arrived at before they came to his room. Either Mr. Ehrenfried or Mr. Gleeson, he thought it was the latter, told him thoy were glad to inform him that the matter had been settled, and upon the following tonns: —Ist. That Mr. Gleeson was to bo bound in the same way as a tenant when in occupation of or licensee of any of the four hotels, the Albion, the City, the Occidental, or tho Aurora. As damages for his previous breaches of the agreement he was, at the expiration of four and a-half years, to take from Mr. Ehrenfried 100 hogsheads of beer at £4 per hogshead, and half duty, less 6s 6d per hogshead ; third, the price of beer for the Albion Hotel was to bo £4 and half duty, less 6s 6d discount. The price of beer for the Occidental was to be £4 and half duty, after tho then tenant (Louton's) departuro. j With regard to tho City Hotel, the question of the price of beer was to be left open, but Mr. Gleeson was to see that the trade covenant was strictly kept. These matters were all fixed before they came into his office, and ho was simply informed of them. A discussion then arose regarding the Aurora Hotel, Mr. Ehrenfried wishing, if possible, to get the price of beer fixed for that hotel as well. Mr. Gleeson expressed himself as not only willing but anxious to do what he could in fixing the price of beer for that hotel, and ultimately it was agreed betweon them that Mr. Gleeson should try and get Mr. Lynch, the lessee, to fix the price at £4 and half duty. A further discussion arose with regard to the question of the supply of wines and spirits to the Albion Hotel, and it was agreed between them that that matter should be left open, Mr. Ehrenfried saying that if the other arrangements were satisfactorily carried out lie would make no trouble about tho wines and spirits. The interview was rather lengthy, and did nob terminate till half-past six, and it was then agreed that witness and Mr. Gleeson should beat Mr. Hesketh's office at ten o'clock next morning, so that proper agreements might bo drawn up, and Mr. Gleeson promised that, in the meantime, ho would see Mr. Lynch, the lessee of the Aurora, and that the action pending should stand adjourned until next sitting, so that the proper deeds might be prepared and executed. When the party left witness' office, he considered the whole matter was settled. The action was adjourned. Witness was round at Messrs. Hesketh and Richmond's offico at ten o'clock next morning, but Mr. Gloeson was not there, and after waiting for some time he left. Soon afterwards he met Mr. Gleeson, and reminded him of his promise, and he said he misunderstood. He thought it was witness alone who was to go to Mr. Heskoth. They then arranged for a subsequent hour. Mr. Gleeson was there at the time appointed, and informed witness that he would not carry out the arrangement. The action subsequently came on on the 6th of August, and the question of quality and price was distinctly raised in the pleadings, but was abandoned by the defendant's counsel, Messrs. Hesketh and Button. In crossexamination witness said ho had an interview with Mr. Lynch on tho Saturday, but ho certainly did not adviso him to refuse to make the arrangement as to the price of beer. This was before Mr. Gleeson had informed him that he would nob carry oub the arrangement of the previous day. , Witness generally acted as Mr. Lynch's solicitor, but was not so on this occasion, or in this matter. Ho was acting for Mr. Ehrenfried, and told Mr. Lynch so. R. F. Lukß, Victoria Hotel, was examined as to the price and quality of the beer which he bought. Michael Foley (licensee of the Avondale Hotel), A. Cairns (formerly licensee of the Star Hotel, the license of which he held until about three months ago, and for seven years previously), gave evidenco as to the prices paid. His wife owned the Ellerslio Hotel, a free house, and the price paid was tho same, £4 6s 6d, a deduction of 5 per cent, being made for prompt payment. William Easdown, formerly licensee of tho Rising Sun Hotel, Karangahape Road ; Joseph Parke?, licensee of the Globe Hotel ; John Lang Kean, licensee until recently of the Park Hotel; William Regan, licensee of the Rob Roy Hotel; Simon Coombe, licensee of the Thames Hotel, corner of Queen and Customs streets, and formerly proprietor of the Foresters' Arms Hotel, Albert-street; Frederick Gaudin, licensee of the Grand Hotel, Princes-street, and a number of other witnesses were examined. They were supplied by various brewers, but all agreed that the net price which they paid was £4 Gs (id a hogshead, or Is 7 M per gallon net, and sometimes more.

R. M. COURT. —Thursday. IHofore Dr. Giles, R.M.] Undefended Casks.—ln tho following undefended cases judgment was given for the plaintiffs : W. J. Hill v. A. Lamb, .£9 Ms 4d, costs £1 4s ; C. B. Stone v. G. Smales, £0 17s lid, costs £1 15s; J. L. Campbell v. C. Robson, £'27 15s, costs £4 Is; \Y. R. (look v. T. Rogers, £4 ss, costs 9s ; W. 11. Cook v. F. Booth, £1 ss, costs 10s; J. H. Dal ton v. Frank Gerald, £6 ISs fid, costs £1 0s ; M. A. Lindsay v. R. Irwin, £1, costs 7s; W. K. Cook v. C. A. Cornea, £1 10s, costs 7s ; W. R. Cook v. R. Hall, £3 17s (id, costs 1 ,'is ; A. Armitage v. H. W. I'eckham, £!) 7s (Id, costs £1 14s; J. W. Harrison v. the Hunua Koad Board, £46 10s, costs £5 '2s ; Auckland Harbour Board v. ]). Oouk, £;>.'{ 15s, costs £:! IL's ; Now Zealand Drug Company v. J. (I. Henderson, £1)6 Gs 4d, costs £5 Ms ; Robert (i ray den v. John Collins, £1 Is, costs 10s Gd. John Peach v. W. Bennett.—Claim £22 lOji lid. Mr. J. M. Alexander appeared for t he plaintiff and Dr. Laishley for defendant. The amount claimed was admitted, bub; tho defendant had a set-oil" of £20 10s lid. The claim arose from a contract to cart scoria for tho Parnoll Borough Council. Peach was to supply the scoria from his own pit, and Bennett was to cart it; but owing to Peach failing to supply the scoria Bennett had to cart it from Mount Albert, thereby making a considerable loss, which was the cause of tho counter-claim, Dr. <Jilea, in giving judgment, said that since. Poach agreed with Bennett to supply the scoria the sot-ofi' must be allowed. Judgment was given for tho plaintiff for tho 15s already paid into Court, and 4s lid additional, with costs 16s 6d. A. J. Entkicax v. Michael McMahon', —Claim, £5 4s. Mr. Thorne appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Brookfield for tho defendant. Mr. A. J. Entrican deposed that he received an order from Captain Moore, of the Enterprise, who has since left the colony, for one ton of flour and three sacks of pigs' feed for Mr. McMahon, which were sent by the Enterprise, and ho believed they wore received by the defendant. Frederick Dalin, mate of the Enterprise, gave evidence as to receiving tho goods and delivering them to McMahon. The defendant deposed that he had ordered the goods from Captain Moore, and that ho had no dealings with plaintiff. Ho had paid Captain Moore previously in hides, skins, and wool. Ho had not given him any permission to pledge his credit for any goods. The plaintiff was nonsuited. Costs, £1 Is. POLICE COURT.— (Before Messrs. S. Y. Collins and A. Boarilman, J. P.'si Drunkenness. —A first offender was fined 5s and costs, or '24 hours imprisonment. Thomas Jones, for. a second offence, was fined 10s and costs, or in default 48 hours. Un'lxghtkd Vehicles.—Samuel Wheeler and Hugh Lcebody were each fined Is and costs for driving vehicles without having sufficient lights. Wanderino Cattle.—Timothy Hays, for allowing two of his horses to be unattended on the Alten Road Reserve, was lined Is and costs. William Grant and William Rush, tho owners of straying cows, were each fined Is and costs. Thomas 1

Crafb was fined Is per head and costs for three straying cows, and Alexander Allen, for allowing two of his calves to be at largo unattended, was fined Is and costs.

PAPAKURA POLICE COURT. Tuesday, July 8. {Before Captain Jackson, R.M., and Mr. D. McLennan, J.P.J Larceny. — Patrick Dunn was charged with tho larceny of a shirt valued at 10s, at Pukekohe on or about the 28th June. The prisoner was remanded to Pukekohe. Neglected Registration.Henry Miller, was charged with the non-registration of the birth of his child within 62 days of its birth. Samuel Walker, registrar, gave evidence that the particulars of birth had nob been furnished in accordance with tho Registration of Births and Deaths Act, 1875. Fined Is and 10s costs. Henry John Parker v. Martin Maiion. —Claim £4 14s 3d, for goods sold and delivered. Judgment for amount claimed, costs 14s, and the amount to be paid at the rate of £1 per month. Mrs. John Lister v. William Vince.— Claim 12s 6d, for work and labour done by her husband. Mr. Franklin appeared for defendant. Plaintiff had no authority fram her husband to sue. The Bench held that it had no jurisdiction in the matter. John T. Steinbridge v. Robert Stevinson.—Claim 3s9d, rates due to the Opaheke Road District. Judgment for tho amount claimed, costs lis. Tho remaining (seven) small debt cases were settled oub of Court.—[Own Correspondent.]