The Courts.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 994, 20 March 1891, Page 17

The Courts.

SUPREME COURT. . + — — Mr H. D. Bell, counsel for the plainti ff, in Whitaker v. Hutchison case, has lodged an appeal against the judgment given by Hia Honour the Chief Justice to the effecu that the names of Mr Mitchelson and Sir Harry Atkinson should not be atrnok out of the suit as defendants. The question will be argued at the Court of Appeal next month. .. The Court of Appeal commences its sitting in Wellington on Monday, the 27th of A A*s’ittlng of the Divorce Court was held on Monday, before his Honour the Chief Justice. One case was down for hearing, viz., Bailey v. Bailey and Sh'elds, a petition from the husband for divorce from his wife on the grounds of her adultery with the co. respondent. The evidence of the petitioner, Robert Bailey, was to the effect that he was married in October, 1885, and he and his wife lived together till June last, when he had reason to suspect Shields, who resided us a boarder in his house. He taxed his wife with having improper intimacy with the co-respondent, and she virtually admitted it She subsequently went to Christchurch, where she lived with Shields, aDd petitioner went there and obtained posaeision of hi? child. Confirmatory evidence as to Mrs Bailey’s conduct in Christchurch was given, and his Honor granted a decree nisi, to be made absolute in three months, the corespondent being ordered to pay the costs. Mr Jelliooe appeared for the petitioner, and the other parties were not represented by counsel. • , . ~ ’ . Argument In the patent case, Roberts v. Campbell, was heard before His Honor the Chief Justice and'the Hon E. Richardson, as assessor, in the Supreme Court in Bancoon Wednesday. The case was an appeal from a decision of the Registrar of Patents to issue a patent to the respondent Campbell. Mr Jeliicoe, for the appellant, now contended that the appeal was like any other proceeding before the Snpreme Court subject to appeal to the Court of Appeal or Privy Council, and final In the absence of snoh an appeal, and that the question of Infringement must therefore be decided on the balance of testimony, as ou an issue involving it in an action for infringement. He also contended that the appellant having patented a principle, together with a particular mode of applying, it was entitled to protection against all other inodes of applying the same principle to the same object ; and that in this case the respondent’s mode of application was praotioally the same as the appellant’s. Mr Qoiok, for the respondent, contended that the decision of the Court could not be final, as any person might be an objector in this proceeding, and other persons interested oonld not be estopped by a decision in a proceeding to which they were not parties, and that therefore the Court musk take np the same position as the Patent Officer wonld, and order the issue of a patent, unless it were beyond all doubt that it ought not to Issue. He further argued that Roberta* specification had not claimed the principle of excavating by means of a mixture of air and water, but merely a particular mode of applying that principle, and that it was therefore open to any one else to patent a different mode of applying the same principle. The argument lasted all day, and the Conrt reserved its decision.

Thursday, March 12. (Before FTi« Honour the Chief Jastice and a jury of four.) MERCK V. WELLINGTON CITY CORPORATION. This was an action in which the plaintiff, the owner of the Te Aro Baths, claimed Xi2oo for damages sustained through the refuse of the city being allowed to get into the baths, which had caused a great falling-off in the business. The following gentlemen formed the jury :—A. M. Cooper (foreman), O. D. Macintosh, J. D. Bremner, and R. Hunter. Mr Brown appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Martin for the Corporation. After counsel for the plaintiff had opened his case, Mr Martin raised the point that notice of action had not been given under the Act, but his Honour decided to leave the point until after the jury had delivered their verdict. Evidence was given to the effect that certain refuse had found its way into the baths, and that persons who previously

patronised the baths were deterred from doing so on account of the state of the W&t6Ft For the defence it was argued that ■whatever was done by the Council in the neighbourhood of the destructor was by way of reclamation, and the material that found its way to the baths was what was put there by other persons, who were warned not to do so. The Town Clerk, the City Surveyor, Mr A. G. Johnson, and his Worship the Mayor, were examined as witnesses, and gave evidence to the effect that the Council intended that the refuse from the destructor was to be used for reclamation purposes, and the wall had not been built solelv to protect the plaintiff. Counsel having addressed the Court, his Honor summed up, placing the following issues to the jury (1) Have the defendants deposited, or Buffered to be deposited, offensive matter on the foreshore of the harbour in the vicinity of the plaintiff’s baths, as is in the statement of claim alleged—a, during the period from July, 1889, to August 16th, 1890 : and, b, during period from August 16th, 1890, to February 16th, 1891? (2.) In consequence of that deposit was the matter washed out to sea and washed into and around the plaintiff’s baths and the land occupied by her ? (3.) Were the baths therefore rendered less fit for use, and was she injured in her business ? If so, what damage has she suffered —a, in the first" period ; and, b, what in the second period? (4.) If the defendants did do as alleged, was it intended to be done under the Te Aro Reclamation Act, 1879, as amended by the Act of 1887. The jury returned to Court after au absence of thirty minutes and answered the issues as follows :—(1.) Yes. (2.) Yes. (3.) Yes ;a, L 125 ;b, L 75. (4.) No. His Honor then entered up judgment for the plaintiff. for L2OO, with costs according to scale. The Court then rose.

(PER PRESS ASSOCIATION.) Auckland, Maroh 12. At the Supreme Court, Bedford and Carroll, two notorious characters, were sentenced to three years’ penal servitude for unlawfully wounding. William George, who was charged with breaking, into a bouse, was released on probation, on account of his previous good character. Other sentences were imposed as follows : J. Greenwood, embezzling moneys belonging to the Omaha Road Board whilst he was clerk and treasurer of that body, three years’ penal servitude; Ellen Geary, for stealing money from the person of another, six months’ imprisonment; Andrew Barrett, for breaking and entering, nine months’ imprisonment ; Thomas John Robson, who pleaded guilty to a charge of making a false declaration respecting the birth of a child, was admitted to probation; John Burton and James Cunningham who were charged with forgery and uttering, were found not gnllty. John Milne, who pleaded guilty of having attempted to commit suicide at Opotikl, was ordered to come up for sentence when called on. > ; Dunedin, March 12.

At the Supreme Court an appeal against the decision of the Resident Magistrate in a ease brought by the Trustees of the Cooks and Stewards Union, was heard. The Magistrate had nonsuited the Trustees, on the ground that only two Bued, and the rules provided for three holding office. Mr Justice Williams upheld the appeal, ruling that in the event of death or removal of one trustee the remaining trustees had all the necessary powers vested in them. Dunedin, March 16. Argnment in arrest of judgment in the eases of Smith v. two English Insurance Companies occupied the Snpreme Conrt all day, his Honor reservieg judgment. Hokitika, March 16. In the Supreme Court to-day, before Mr Justice Denniston, the Grand Jury threw out the bill againßt McLeod, the railway shunter at Brunnerton, charged .with manslaughter through the fatal accident to a child, alleged to be attributable to McLeod’s negligence. True bills were returned on four- other charges. Stacey admitted the charge of breaking and entering at West Brooke, but said he wss drunk. He was sentenced to two years’ hard labour. R. Carlyle, charged with stealing, was found guilty, and sentenced to 18 months. It was alleged that this man la a lunatic, bat the jury decided that he is Bane, Frank Steele, charged with forgery, pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to two years’ bard labour. P. Lagoni, Indicted for maliciously wounding, was found not guilty. This conolndad the criminal business. The civil eases will commence to-morrow morning. Hokitika, March 17.

In the Supreme Court the civil list was taken up by the case of the National Bank ▼. Beeehe, the Reefton branch suing for £3GS and interest on the amount of a dishonored cheque. The case was heard before a jury of four. The Issue tnrned on the point whether the cheque had been left as security for. certain advances to a third party. The jury found in the affirmative. Mr Justice Denniston entered judgment for the plaintiff for the amount, with interest and costs on the highest scale, giving the defendant leave to move again. Three cases, including a breach of promise, were settled out of Court. The case to reoover damages for false imprisonment and malicious prosecution is now proceeding.