DISTRICT COURT.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 3789, 29 May 1885, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

A PEOULIAB CASE.

[By Teleqbaph.J

Inveecabqili, May 28. At the District Court to-day, Judge Ward gave judgment in tbe case Hamilton v. Beade, in which, owing to some peculiar features the case presented His Honor decided to reserve judgment until this Coart sittings. Tbe claim was for £l9l, the amount of a verdict given in the case of Hamilton v. Organ and Go. Tbe money recovered was paid to Mr Beade as solicitor for the plaintiff, and by him handed to MoArdell manager L. and M. A. Co. on consideration that be would accept a bill of £2OB, due by tbe plaintiff to the National Mortgage Co. Hamilton asserted that the money was banded by Mr Beade to Mr MoArdell without bis consent, and now sued to recover the amount. His Honor gave judgment for the defendant without costs. Mr Matthews stated that since tbe bearing of tbe case dt tbe last sitting Mr McArdell’s bill hod matured, and defendant had issued a writ upon it in the Supreme Court, and judgment was obtained against him. Mr Beade said be bad taken the proceedings to protect himself in tbe event of the present action going against him. He did not intend to proceed further on tbe bill. His Honor said Mr Beade bad already proceeded against the bill. He bad sworn in the witness box that he had paid the money over to Mr McArdell to release tbe bill, and yet bad issued a writ and obtained judgment for the amount it represented. Had the Court known of the circumstances, judgment would have been against the defendant. Unfortunately tbe judgment could not now be reversed. Mr Finn said it was a matter which could be considered by the Law Society. Mr Beade gave his assurance that he bad not tbe slightest intention of proceeding further with his action. His Honor said Mr Beade bad no right to proceed on the bill. Not only should the matter be considered by the Law Society, but it should also be brought before the Judge of tbe Snprenle Court. Mr Beade said he was quite willing that bio conduct should be investigated by the Judge of tbe Supreme Court. His Honor said it probably would be. It was fortunate for him that the judgment was given before he knew of tbe matter, or it wonld have been given against him. Mr Matthews wonld consider whether be would appeal. The evidence taken at tbe hearing plus tbe defendant’s admission that be had taken action on the bill would justify a verdict for the defendant.

On the application of the Official Assignee to annul a bill of sale and mortgage for £2135, given by F. R. White, hotelkeeper of Winton, to T. Surmao, within four weeks of sequestration was granted. His Honor said he believed Surman intended to act honorably in the matter, and was unaware of the position of White, who owed large sums to other creditors.