DISTRICT COURT.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11919, 20 January 1894, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT.

« Fill DAY, 19'fH JANUABT. (Before His Honor Mr District Judge Kettle.) CIVIL BUSINESS, A special Bitting of Hie jjiotricl Court wns held to-day for tlie purpose of hearing nu action brought by J. Kean against J. W. MoDuff and also a cros3 action. Mr Watt appeared for plaintiff and Mr Treadwell for defendant. In opening his case, Mr Walt said that in the case of Kean v. McDuff, A. McDuff and Kean woro partners as tailors and held a bill of sale over a mare called Kai IwiLady for an amount due by the owner to the firm. On December lltb they dissolved partnership on the understanding fiatthe assets should go to Kean. It would appear that the terms of partnership ivere that A. McDuff was to put certain capital into the business, which capital he obtained from his father. At the time of the dissolution— or just shortly afterwards— McDuff, senr., heard of it, and appears to have been dissatisfied with tha terms, He endeavoured to make better terms for liis son, and took from plaintiff's oflico or shop the bill of sale over this mare, saying he would hold it as security for certain moneys which plaintiff had promised to McDuff— about .£33— on going out. That promise was mado by plaintiff on the strength of a btatoment of account made by MoDuff, which subsequently was found to ba totally incorrect. He therefore declined to pay tbo amount promised. Sincn being in possoasiou of the bill of sale, McDuff appoarud lo have assumed control over tho mare, theroby preventing plaintiff from racing her. He claimed the return of the mare, damages for detention, and other small charges amounting in all to .£IBB. Evidonee was thon given by Kean, relative to the details of the partnership agreement. He stated that the statement of accounts made up by McDuff on diesolvinc partnership, showed assots ovor liabilities to the amouLt of .£lO9 19s 9d, Bince then the books were carefully gone into by Mr Mailman. The maro, Kai Iwi Lady, was run by the firm. She was in the firm's possession for racing purposes free of cost, the owner only desiring her at tho ond of her racing carour for brooding pucposos. She won two races at Waugauui, the winnings boing placod to tho firm's credit. When the dissolution was signed ho understood that slto was to become his (Kuan's) proporty. The bill of sale over the maro was valuod at £12 12s. ISy Mr Treadwell— Had agreed lo hand over his bill of sale to Mr McDuff on his advancing another £25 for the business. .This was on tho 20th, and thoy had agreed to dissolve on the 18th— two days previous, On tho eveuing of the 20th he sent for Mr Bulter, trainer. Did not tell him that Mr &Tc Duff would be responsible for the training of tho horae. Told him that ho (Kean) would pay all costs. It was quito true that A. McDuff was suod for a partnership debt about tho timo of the signing of the document. Know that it wtis intended us an advertisomont to show thoy had dissolvod. Hud nevor objected to Mr Dagg witnossing tho document. Had never uskod or written to Mr McDuff, sent'., for the possoscion of tho maro, nor had he over, before the issue of the summons, charged him with having wrongfully detained tho mare. In tho first cuee judgment was pivon for tho defendant, with costs. In the cross-action judgment wont for tho plaintiff for £H 5s 3d, and costs ; and it was ordered that Iho horse in possession of the plaintiff bo delivered up on paymont of above amount and costs, and £2 a week for the keep cf tho horse from the 18th November until timo of setllemenc.