A QUESTION OF DUTY

Southland Times, Issue 17048, 22 May 1912, Page 6

A QUESTION OF DUTY

(Per United Presd Association.) WELLIXGTOX, May 21. A qv.es lion of duty was involved in a Supremo Court notion this afternoon. The parties to the notion were His Hlajcsty The Kins, plaintiff, and Walter Leopold F.nller, of Wellington, Gilhert Main of Palmerston North, surviving executors of the will of Walter Lowry Bn Her, barrister, late of Wellington, and A. L. Herdmnn :ind 11. U, M. Anderson. barristers, executors of the will of Arthur Percival Puller, barrister, lateof Wellington, defendants. It was set out In the statement of claim that prior to I’Hh February, ISO.'!, Walter La wry Puller was the proprietor and bonelici.il owner of 10u0 acres of land at Xereru, Mniiawatu, and of that on that date he transferred to his sons Walter Leopold Puller and Arthur Percival Puller for £2OOO. The transier was at tl’.e lime presented to the Commissioner of Stamps for assessment of stamp duty and stumped as on a conveyance on sal I .' for £2'/'.'°. stamp duty amounting to £ls being paid. The memorandum of transfer was registered by the sons on the 12th Idee., H95. On 19th July, 190 C, 'Walter Lawry Puller died and probate of his will was granted to Arthur Percival Puller, Walter Leopold Puller and Gilbert Hair, his executors. On 2Slh Feb., 1910, Arthur I’ercivnl Puller died and probate of his will was granted to his executors, A. L. Herdman and 11. K. Anderson. The sum of £2OOO expressed to have been paid by the sons to Walter Lawry Puller was not paid and the real value of too property at the lime of execution of registration of tlio transler was £IOOO. This transfer was a deed of gill within the meaning of the Hlamp Act Amendment Act and dub.' was assessable

thereon at £2lO. ’l'liere was also payable. it was alleged, a line id’ Phi per centum, and Judgment was claimed at £IOO. being llie amount of duty and line. Mr Justice Cooper presided. .Mr W. Sa!rnond (Solicitor-General ' appeared for the Crown, and .Mr t’. I’. Sherreti. K.C.. with him Mr 11. U. Anderson, tVr defendants. Argument was part lie,ml Vhen the Court rose for tlm day.