SUPREME COURT.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXVIII, Issue 5832, 24 February 1906, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

a verdict for the crown, iiutt river hoard r. the king. In tills matter which was argued before Ills Honor tin- Chief .Justice- on Wedne-dav I;,*;. !>:• Findlay and Mr Tmnhv.-U' appeared for the suppliant, an-! Mr M.v.-rs for tin- Crown. JSis Honor, in delivering ills ro.-ervod »il'!"mo»it. i-aid tin- agreement between Hi,-' parties provided that the -Minister Ist Raihvav, could talio -torn.- an'-! .sti-nglo trim th- Unit titer if the Raih-.av LVpuain.-nt ton-trnctod n railv,ay and e-ding, for tho purpose ol srenrine bida.l troni the river. It also provided that the Hntt River IV.a; d or anv jerons authorised by Hem i.lnn.i.i' have the right <>f using -i'..a.. |,, r t |i«. ...urniw; of removing 'JI„. nn-sti-m war: What . i.!k, nieanin-' of the word.* m tho . .-n eii:. -shail be Hoc of charge up an average o! t--n thousand cubic yards per aiuiiiin.'’ Having cited amliorities bearing on the t.-ee. hi. I loam-I-aid there mu nothing in tie- eoniext or in any part of He- document that- could be invoked to -!c,-.v U.at :ho ordinary moanin'; of the ■.verd-s in Him c;io was nut to lie foli.c.ved. (;:i -he coiitrary. tin- fact that tie- rail-.., v v.s; - to la- ureal by theHoard v ile’,., h ■ mimm-ed, not being i |,v H; ■ (level loflcll-. . tOIUICtI tO shin-.' Hn.t vermnont was not

c-.mpelbd to take out a certain proportion' of 1. d!-m per vc,ir. He must, tlu r. fore, read Ui- '.voids as showing ‘that, -» long : - the average <iid not exceed 10,000 cubic yards per rear, no charge could be made: and it could not be ascertained whether this average was exceeded until tho close of the period of tun years, because the average n-.ii, to be- an average- for a term el years, and it conic) not be ascertained until that term bad ended. Tho fact, therefore-, that during tho first two years of the term more- than 20,000 cubic- yards lied been taken did not "ivn the suppliant any claim against the Crown. It might happen that at the- end of tile- term 100.000 cubic yards —that was an average of 10,001) cubic yards for ton years—would not have been taken, and therefore no charge would lie payable. Ho determined that the suppliant had no claim against the Crown. He- fixed the costs at £25 and disbursements. A BLENHEIM APPEAL, CASE.

Yesterday bis Honor the Chief Justice' was asked to' consider a motion for a change of venue in the case of Corry v. Clouston and Co., Ltd., of .Blenheim. Dr Findlav appeared for the plaintiff. and Mr 11. 1). Bel! for tho defendant.

In t!ii.s case the plaintiff, John Joseph Cony sued the defendants to recover £3OOO damages for wrongful dismissal. Tho matter camo to trial at Blenheim, when a verdict was found for plaintiff for £S7S, with costs. This verdict was upheld hy the Court of Appeal ; but when it was referred by tho defendant company to the Privy Council a new trial was ordered to bo held before a jury.

Dr Findlay asked for a change of venue to Nelson, on the ground that tho special jury panel at Blenheim was small, and that most of tho persons who would he empanelled would have business relations with the parties concerned. Kelson, ho urged, would bo a convenient place to re-try tho action. Mr Bell contended that tho issues wore such that they should bo tried hy a much larger jury panel than was available in Nelson. The question was whether drunkenness was compatible with business capacity, and entitled an employer to dismiss an employee. Tho matter was one of groat importance, and Mr 801 l submitted that the vomio should bo changed to Christchurch or Dunedin.

Having hoard argument, his Honor said that from what lie knew of Nelson jurors, ho could say they wore very impartial, and, indeed, ho had formed a very high opinion of them. Ho granted tho change of ventto to Nekon, and reserved tho question of costs.