MAGISTERIAL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 4942, 5 March 1884, Page 2

MAGISTERIAL.

"• CHRISTCHURCH. This Da.t. (Before R. Beothain, Esq., R,M.) Drunkenness. — Andrew Millar, for being drunk in Latiiner square' on Fob. 20,. was fined 10a, and ordered to pay 10b for maintenance in gaol during the seven dayshe had been remanded. Alleged Stealing op a Chhqub. — Samuel Hanson waß charged with stealing a cheque for JE7G, drawn on the Union Bank of Australia, Chrißtchurch, tho property of one Hanßen, at Oamaru. Mr Kippenberger appeared for the accused. On tho application of Inspector Vender, tho case wbb remanded till Friday week, bail beingallowed, prisoner himself in £100, and one surety in £100. Tho witnesses in the case are residing some in Oamaru, some in Kaiapoi, and some In Christohurch. Alleged Fobgebt. — Cornelius Corrigaa was charged with forging and uttering a cheque on tho National Bank of New Zealand for £6. Detective O'Connor deposed that at about midnight he hod charged prisoner with the offence. Prisoner denied it at first, but afterwards said that a young fellow had cashed the cheque for him, but he did not writ« H out. H» said he thought the signer, Puflett, was good enough. The cheque was signed " Robert Puflett," and had been uttered to Mr Belgrave, of the Crown Hotel, but the signature waa a forgery. Prisoner said he was drunk, and knew no more about the matter, and it was for tho police to find out who wrote it. Mr Kipponbergor, who appeared for the prisoner, did not' cross-examine the witness. On the application of Inspector Ponder, tho prisoner was remanded till to-morrow. CIVIL PASES. ' W. Cuddok v. G. Habt and Others. — His Worship postponed giving judgment in this case. , Sargood, Son, and Ewbnv. Bbown. — In this case this evidence had been taken by Commission at Dunedin. It was a suit to recover J863 2s 4d, half commision on a bankrupt estate in which defendant was co-trustee with Mr Watt. Mr Harper appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr Stringer for the defendant. For the defence Mr Brown deposed that he was manager in Christchurch for the plaintiffs. He had been engaged in London by Mr Ewin in 187*, and before Mr Young was a member of the New Zealand firm. No alteration beyond an advance in salary had since taken place. Had not engaged to becomeTrustee in any estates for the firm. Had acted as a co-Trustee in the estate of Craig and Smyth. As a rule* paid commissions received with the firm. As trustee in the estate of Craig and Smyth had rccoived the amount now, sued for. The CBtato was not yet wound up. Witness' engagement closed on July 17, but iat the request of Mr Young m remained till August 1. Tho greater part of tho work connected with Craig and Smyth'B estate had still to bo done then. The work connected with it Was* chiefly done by witness at. home, Craig and Smyth became bankrupt in January, and the Trustees had action* against three Insurance Companies, but subsequently abandoned them. During the interval 'the business was carried on by Mr Craig, who was paid a salary. This accounted in a great measure for the delay in winding up the estate. Had received from plaintiffs a letter dated Oct. 10, 1882, telling him he was fully responsible as trustee in Mulligan's estate. To* Mr Harper : Consulted them as croditors, and, aB his principals consulted with other croditors as to renewal of a bill, acted as trustee in Mulligan'B, Simpson's, Fraser and Co.'b, George Gordon's, and othersAccounted to the plaintiffs for commission in Mulligan'B. Could not remember as to the othors. Reooived an application' for the commission on Jan. M. Received a great portion of the commission before leaving plaintiff's employ. There remained a second dividend to be distributed, and the balance-sheet to bo written up. Believed the trustees received bills receivable after he left plaintiff's employ.' The balance-sheet was made up In August or September. In May \aatJ855 each was paid to the trustees. The remainder was paid in August. The final dividend was paid in November, and was> 2s 5d in thp £. Tho first dividend was 10s, and was paid in May. Was 8J years in the firm's' employ. Mr Harper addressed the Court, citing Morrison v. Thompson, L.R. 9, Q.B. 480, aa embodying tho whole of the law upon the subject, and Evans " On Principal and Agent," 243. Mr Stringer contended that the law quoted by his learned friend did not apply to the, present case. Morrison v. Thompson was ft case in which the defendant acted as agent strictly forth* plaintiff ; and made his profit in connection with his employment. This commission wae not an earning in connection with the engagement, which was mado prior to the Debtors' and Creditors' Act. It would bo a fair test to ask could Mr Brown have been dismissed for rofusing to act as trustee. If not, the commission wa* not such nn earning aB would entitle the raaßtcr to receive it. Finally, ho contended that the commission had not boen received till long after the termination of the defendant's engagement. Logally, MiBrown was not entitled to receive it till the estate was wound up, which had not yet been done. On this point he cited Cutler v. Power, 2, Smith's " Leading Coses." Had the defendant, as trustoe, incurred a large amount of costs in an action, could he compel the plaintiffs to pay those . eoflts P Mr Harper replied that undoubtedly defendant could have recovered the costs, supposing him not to have taken care to be indemnified by thqereditors as was usually the case. As to tho final winding up of the estate that had nothing to do with the payment of tho commission, which was purely a matter of arrangement with the croditors. There was nothing in the Act preventing tho trustees taking thecommission at any time. He submitted that tho trußteeß could not bo made to' return the .commission, which was a first charge. He contended that tho cohob referred to by Mr Stringer applied to master and Bervant as fully aa to principal and agent. His Worship postponud judgment till Thursday, Murch 20. Buchanan v. Cabmigkakl and Son. — This wa3 an action to recover £49 1b Bd, for work done and material supplied. Mr Harper appeared for tho plaintiff, Mr Thomas for tho defendants. Robert Buchanan, ironfoutader : Had cast a quani tity of ironwork for tho Tuam Btreot hall. Defendants took delivery in the foundry. The work was done on Mr Lambort's order. Had been paid for part of tho work, .£lB7 0s 9d. To Mr Thomas : Saw defendants' ! drays come into tho ynrd onco at' j least. They then took about thirty I of tho balusters to go round tho front cf ' the gallery. It was not Byrnes' dray. j Never had written orders. Verbal orders were received from Mr Lambort, who gave no tracings of thorn. The goods wore entered to the Public Hall Company. Had no instructions to so enter thorn. The accounts were sometimes sent to tho Clerk of tho Works, and sometimes sent to Mr Lambert's office. Had not charged Mr Lambert. Was not aware that he had sent defendants' an account at all. Defendants paid tho former account on the j order of the architect, and now refused to pay on a similar order. Bolioved a : demand for the amount had been niado on i the Public Hall Company by his solicitor. J Carmichael came one day to boo if the ! balusters had been ordered. Witnoes did not remember any conversation as to who 1 was to pay for tho new work Knew there*

nroa suoh an item in the contract. Was positive that Mr Caranohael did not draw his attention to tho architect's power to strike out the item of balustera. Had not told Mr Piper that tho Public Hall Company ■were going to pay all the claims. Hud, nob told Piper that he would sue the Company at onco, unle9s ho learned in writing from Mr Lainlwt, when the Company would pay. T.S.Lambert! By the specifications -the defendants were to provido a lump Bum of £80 for castings. [Left sitting.] LYTTELTON. This Day. (Befora John Ollivier, Esq., R.M., and H. Allwright, Esq.) Prisons' Act. — Joines M'Gregor, a prisoner, was charged with making false and frivolous complainta against Warders Gilchrist and Little. Warder Thoinaa Idttle said: Prisoner charged mo with assaulting him ; tho charge is falso. I •used no more violence than was necessary to remove him. Ho tried to strik* me, and, when ordered to tako off hk «lothes, he having been ordered solitary confinement, ho Btruck Warder Gilchrist an my piesonce. Assistant-warder Gilchrist Baid there was no more violence used than was necessivry to pvit prisoner into the cell. Principal-warder Pritchord said he had heard the complaints made by prisoner before the Vißiting Justices. Rcmombered Jan. 27 ; tho officers mentioned wore' merely doing theiv duty as they were ordered to. H\ JLUwright, Visiting Justice, said : I inTeatigated tho chargo made against the officers of tho Prison, and remanded the case to, bo doalt with by the Residen* Magitrnte's Court. Prisoner then made a statement that Warders Little and Gilohriflt, had struck him more than once on a certain day, after he had been placed in a solitary cell, Prisoner was sentenced to forfeit 14 days' marks, and to suffer seven days' solitary confinement. Nbolected Children. — Ellen Maud Anthony and Mark Anthony, aged Beyen mnd four years, were charged with being neglected children, within tho meaning of the Industrial SOIIOOI3 Act. Sergeant Jfason Baid that Mrs Anthony had been deserted by her husband, but was living ■with another man. Mrs Anthony, called, said she sometimes earned .£1 a week. An order had been made she Baid for the husband to maintain the children. Hiß Worship said he was unable to send tho children to Burnham, but stops would be taken to compel tho parents to Bupport them. Stowaway. — Thonias Green, brought up <m remand on the charge of being a stow.* away on board tho Hauroto, pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to pay his for© or go to gaol for 14 days. Unlicensed Hawker. — C. Martin was charged with selling goods on a vacant section off London street, without being a duly licensed hawker under tho Lyttelton by-law. Defendant admitted Belling the goods, but denied hawking them about. Ho said he had not understood that ifc wha necessary to have a license to sell goods on a private property. Fined 40s and costs, ThbbAtbninq Language. — Green v. Beaumont. Mr Nalder for complainant. Beaumont was oharged with using threat■ening and abiisive language. Complainant said that last Sunday defendant threatened to put a knife through him, because he said he owed -him JE3O. Another witness corroborated the evidence of Green. — Beaumont admitted haying said he would "punch Green's head," btit denied having threatened to use a knife. Had great provocation. \ Fined 20s and coats, and cautioned that he might havo to .find sureties to keep the peace. ' [Left Bitting.]