THE COURTS.

New Zealand Times, Volume LI, Issue 8471, 21 August 1888, Page 6

THE COURTS.

SUPREME COURT.—CIVIL SITTINGS. (Before the Chief Justico and a special jury.) BUNNY V. BENNETT AND OTHERS. This was an action for the recovery of the sum of L 317 10s, brought by Arthur Rigby Bunny, solicitor, of Mastorton, againt Thomas Bennett, R. Fairbrother, both settlers, of Carterton, and Henry Bunny, settler, of Featherston, trustees of the Carterton Rifle Volunteers.

Mr W. B. Edwards, with him Mr 0. Bunny, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr E. G. Jellicoe, with him Mr J. Thompson, for the defendants. The following gentlemen wore sworn in as a special jury—Messrs J. R. Blair (foreman), Arthur Dorset, David T. Stuart, John Maginnity, Charles P. Powles, Fredk. de Jersey Clere, Peter J. Hervey, John Kirkcaldie, George Brown, jun., John H. Heaton, Bernard Loughrey and Win. F. Barraud.

The plaintiff alleged that on the sth of October, 1887, the sum of' L28210s was advanced to the defendants by E. J. Riddiford, in order that they might complete the purchase of the Town Hall, at Carterton, and that the defendants agreed to repay this sum in a few days. On the 18th of the same month the plaintiff purchased the debt from Riddiford, and the defendants were informed of this. On the 19th June the amount was absolutely assigned to the plaintiff by Riddiford. On the 18bh October last an assignment of a policy of insurance for LSOO on the Hall was taken by the plaintiff. The building was destroyed by fire shortly afterward, and after negotiations with the Insurance Companies the plaintiff accepted the sum of L 465 in full satisfaction of the claim. The defendants disputed the propriety of this settlement, and the plaintiff' bad paid the full amount to them under protest. The plaintiff now sought to recover the sums of L 282 10s (money received by Riddiford and assigned to the plaintiff), and L 36 the difference between the amount of the insurance policy and the amount paid by the Insurance Companies. The defendant, Fairbrother, denied that Riddiford had advanced the sum of L 282 10s to the defendants, and alleged that if the plaintiff, in his own name, obtained assignment of the policy of insurance, ho did so whilst acting as solicitor for the trustees in fraud of the trustees, and contrary to his duty as such solicitor, and the settlement, if any, was effected by the plaintiff without their authority and against their will. The defendant, ' Bennett, also denied that Riddiford had advanced the sum of L 282 10s to the Trustees, hut he admitted that Riddiford had lent him that sum on 21st September last for the purpose of discharging certain election expenses and furthering the return pf Henry Bunny to Parliament. He further alleged that he was instructed by Riddiford to undertake all expenditure and employ such persons in and about the election of the said Henry Bunny which should be deemed necessary, Riddiford underbaking to indemnify him against all liability, arid that if the plaintiff took an assignment of the insurance policy he did so in fraud of the trustees and against their wish. Bennett further alleges that on the 18th October last the sum° of L7O was paid by Fairbrother to the plaintiff on account of Riddiford, and before thoactionthedefendantmade tender of Lll7 5s Id, and that the latter sum was sufficient to satisfy the plaintiff’s claim, and it had been agreed by the plaintiff and defendants that "for the purposes of this action that sura should be treatei as having been paid into Court. Bennett put in° a set-off and counter claim, alleging that he had incurred liabilities to the amount of L 95 4s lid in connection with the election in carrying out Riddiford’s instructions, and that sufficient time elapsed before the beginning of the action to enable the defendant Bennett to have the said agreement performed by Riddiford. The latter had nob indemified Bennett from liability, and in consequence he had been obliged to pay the sum of L 95 4s lid, which amount he was willing to set off against the plaintiffs claim, and in the alternative he claims the sum mentioned with interest thereon at 8 per cent. W. G. Beard, solicitor, of Masterton ; H. H. Walters, insurance agent, of Carterton ; E. J. Riddiford, sheepfarmer, and A. R. Bunny, the plaintiff, gave evidence. The examination in chief of the latter had only concluded when the Court adjourned at 5.50. The case will bo resumed at 10 this morning.