DISTRICT COURT.

Timaru Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 3329, 29 May 1885, Page 3

DISTRICT COURT.

(By Telegraph.) Invebcabgill, May 28. At the District Court to-day, Judgo Ward gave judgment m the caso Hamilton v. Reado, m which, owing to some peculiar features the case presented, Dia Honor decided to reserve judgment until this Court sittings. The claim was for £171, the amount of a verdict given m the case of Hamilton v. Organ and Co. The money recovered was paid to Mr Keade as solicitor for the plaintiff, and by him handed to Mr McArdell, manager I/, and M.A. Co,, on consideration that ho would accept a bill of £208, due by the plaintiff to the National Mortgage Co. Hamilton asserted that tho money was handed by Mr Heade to Mr McArdell without his consent, and now sued to recover the amount. His Honor gave judgment for the defendant without costs. Mr Matthews stated that since tho hearing of the case at the last sitting Mr McArdell's bill had matured, and defendant had issued a writ upon it m tho Supremo Court, and judgment was obtained against him. Mr Keado aaid ho had taken the proceedings to protect himself m the event of the present action going against him. He did not intend to proceed further on the bill. His Honor said Mr Reade had already proceeded against the bill. He had sworn m the witness box that he liad paid tho money over to Mr McArdell to rcleoso the bill, and yet had issued a- writ and obtained judgment for the amount it represented. Had the Court known of the circumstances, judgment would have been against tho defendant. Unfortunately the judgment could not now be reversed. Mr Finn said it was a matter which could be considered by the Law Society. Mr Eeado gave his assurance that ho had the slightest intention of proceeding further with his action. His Honor said Mr Beade had no right to proceed on the bill. Not only should the matter be considered by tho Law Society, but it should also be brought before the Judge of the Supreme Court. Mr Beade said he was quite willing that his conduct should be investigated by the Judge of the Supreme Court. His Honor said it probably would be. It was fortunate for him that the judgment was given before he know of the matter, or it would have been given against him. Mr Matthews could consider whether he would appeal. The evidenco taken at the hearing plus tho defendant's admission that he had taken action on the bill would justify a verdict for the plaintiff. On tho application of the Official Assignee to annul a bill of sale and mortgage for £2135, given by F. E. White, hotelkecper, of Winton, to T. Surman, within four weeks of sequestration, was granted. His Honor said he believed Surman intended to act honorably m the matter, and was unaware of the position of White, who owed largo sains to other creditors.