AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 13768, 5 June 1908, Page 7

AUCKLAND SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTINGS.

A CHARACTER VINDICATED.

The civil sittings of the Auckland Supreme Court were continued before Mr. Justice Edwards yesterday. An action wag brought by VictorEhrman against the Auckland Electric Tramways Company, Limited, for £500 damages for alleged malicious prosecution. The case arose out of proceedings in the Police. Court, in which the plaintiff was charged with stealing a quantity of tickets belonging to the company, the case -having been dismissed. Messrs. F. E. Baarne, K.C.. and R. McVeagh appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. F. Earl for the defendant company.

Mr. Baume stated that a settlement satisfactory to both parties had been arrived at, and the case might be struck out. It had been recognised by the company that the plaintiff had no desire in the proceedings other than to vindicate his character, and in these circumstances, the company had given him the following letter, which in accordance with the agreement between the parties, and subject to His Honor's permission, was to be read in open court. The letter in question ran: — "Mr. Victor Ehrmau. Dear sir,—With respect to the recent prosecution of yourself at the instance of my company, I desire to say that, in view of the facts especially those previously unknown to me—elicited at the investigation before the magistrate, which resulted in' the charge being dismissed without your defence being called upon, it is a pleasure and a satisfaction to me to accept that investigation and its result as entirely removing any reflection on your excellent character for honesty and integrity. It is also a matter of regret to me that you should have suffered the pain and annoyance of the proceedings, which, however, I think, in the circumstances, will not, and certainly ought not, to have any illeffect on your future.— J. J. Wat.kxatk, Mr;; tgcr."

Mr. Earl said that the managing director of the company felt that Mr. Ehrman, having been submitted to the ordeal. of the investigation before the magistrate, from which he had successfully emerged, was fairly entitled to the full benefit of the dismissal of the charge against him, and it appearing that the plaintiff in the present action was not seeking damages, but rather a vindication of his character, which Mr. Walklate conceded the circumstances entitled him to", there had been no difficulty in arriving at the settlement. The case was struck out accordingly.

A BUTTER TRANSACTION. ' A claim for £450 damages for alleged bleach of contract was made by Wright, Stephenson and Co., represented by Mr. .Tanks, against J. Adams and Co., . represented by Mr. McVeagh. Mr. Tunks explained that the question at issue was merely the assessment of damages. It was not proposed to call evidence, on the" subject, as there was a question of law to be settled; and as soon a<s this was done, it would be a simple enough matter to settle, the amount. The defendants bad entered into a' contract with the plaintiffs last year to supply '20 to 30 tons of lirsfc grade butter and live to 10 tons of the second grade, to be deliver;ed in portions extending over a period of live months, vi/.. from 'October to FebiruaTy."The total quantity to be delivered wits' 1000 boxes.' As a matter of fact, only 400 boxes were delivered, leaving a, deliciency of 600 spread over the whole period The average quantity which should have been delivered was 200 boxes per month, but none at all was delivered in October, only 50 boxes in November," 108 boxes iii December, 125 in January, and 93 in February. 'The price of butter went up after the contract was entered into, and at the etui of February was very much higher than the contract price. The, plaintiffs having .made contracts in London, had to fall kick on the defendants, and now claimed the difference on. the shortage at the end of February, as between the contract and the market price. The defendants, on the other hand, contended that the damages should )>e assessed as at the end of each mouth.

After argument, Mis Honor reserved his decision.

TRAMCAR V. LORRY.

J. J. Craig, Limited, sued the Auckland Electric Tramways Company, Limited, for £100 damages, alleged to have been sustained by one of the defendant's cars running into one of their lorries, on January 13 Mr. J. R. Reed appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr. Newton for the defendants. " ,

John Traeey, a*driver in the employ of J. J. Craig, Limited, stated that on the morning in question he drove a lorry and pair of horses up Symonds-street. On. Hearing Ea*t-£treet. he had occasion. to cross over to the right side of the road, in order to give his horses a drink. When he first saw the car it was near Reid's shop, and in the ordinary course of events, he would have, had plenty of time in which to cross. The. car, however, was travelling at twice the ordinary speed he would not like to say what that was and struck the lorry on the corner, throwing it and the horses up against one of the tramway poles. One horse was killed and the other injured, and witness had to go to the hospital, where he, remained several days.

William Spedding, a passenger by the tramcar in question, stated that he joined it at Dominion Road. Further on the motorman had to put back to a siding, in order to allow another car, going to Kingsland,' to pass. After that the motorman seemed in a hurry, and when passengers were getting off and on at the Symondsstreet corner, kept sounding the gong repeatedly. He then ran the car at an unusually, quick pace down the hill. The impact was a- severe one.

Josiah Lawrie, another passenger by the car, described the pace at which it was travelling as very —like an express train down the street. .

Herbert Tatterstall, a monumental mason, who witnessed the accident from the corner of East-street, also considered that the car was travelling at an excessive speed. This closed the case for the plaintiffs. Ernest Tuke, motonnan of the car in question, stated that on Hearing East-street he noticed Craig's lorry crossing the line about 30yds further down. He did not see the lorry before, because a car was coming up on the up line, and hid it from view. Witness rang the gong loudly and applied all the brakes. The car, however, skiddad and struck the lorry. Witness was thrown out on to the road, and was taken to the hospital. The car, when it struck the lorry, was going about six miles an hour.

The casi was not concluded, and the Court adjourned until 10.30 this morning.