HOW AND WHY THE RADICALS LOST
SUPREME COURT.
THE GAME. An Architect, hut not well skill'd '. Thought he a pyramid Would build, , A pyramid political I mean,' ' Such as had ne'er before been seen; Old Smith and-Rowlands'ut''the base, Wakefield to take the middle place, - The Architect himself the top would grace, But pyramids to be well made ' : ' ■' ' Should have foundations firmly laid'; ' ' And every course of masonry, •- : Should even, true, and level be.,. . Now Smith was tall and 'Rowlands hot •'•' And so when Wakefield up,was .set,. .. ,; : No sort of footing could he. get; .. ."- The foot on Smith high up did go, "' ' The Rowland's foot three foet below , And eveiy time they stirred at all The danger was.that down 1 he'd fall ; And so at last with fearful thud, The builder tumbled in the lnucl." ' MOBAX. All you who seek id 'soar on high Keepi this my moral, in your eye, Ambition is a slippery thing, Not every man can b"e the king, He that would to the throne aspire, 'i Would wisely act to climb no higher, Than he with safety can retire, Lest failing to obtain the crown He lose his head and tumble down, Like to the Architect afoiesnid, .. . ' - Of whom now nothing need be more said.
On Wednesday the 14th Instant, his Honor Mr. Justice Gresson held an adjourned Sittings of the Supreme Court, fur the despatch of Civil business, when the following- cause was tried by Special Jiiiy. ' . Rowlands v Plimmer.
Mr. King and Mr. Bunny for Plaintiff, Mr. Brandon for Defendant.
This was i<n action to recover damages fur the non-performance of certain agreements which were inserted in a Draft Lease of premises situate in Mulgravestreet, and subsequently in ii counterpart Lease, but which had never been executed. The evidence was very leugtliy and conflicting, the Plaintiff declaring that all the covenants were known to the Defendant when he took possession by means of the Draft Lease which was sent to him tho Defendant previous to taking possession.
The Defendant declared that the covenants mentioned in the draft lease were entirely different to the terms of agreement which he had verbally uinde with the Plaintiff previous to the entering on possession, and that sometime after he read over .the draft lease, he returned it that it might be inado according to what he understood the , terms to be. The trial lasted fiom Wednesday morning till Thursday evening, when the 'jury round a verdict for Plaintiff, damages ;£-iO lo.s. 0.1. FnniAY, 16th July. Wright v. ■ Stockbridge.Mr. King and Mr. Bunny fur Plaintiff, Mr' Brandon for Defendant. This action which was tried hy a Special Jury, was brought to recover for lo3s sustained by a fire having destroyed about 60 cords of firewood, and a large number of posts and. rails the property of the plaintiff. -,- > The Plaintiff deposed, to having seen the fue approaching from the defendants land, and a witness of the name of Pepper gave evidence to the effect—that on the day when the fire ; occurred, he was in the employ of the defendant and went to work with a son of the defendants who told him that his father had said that they were to pile the rubbish in heaps, and burn it off. The Defendant deposed that ho never gave instructions to any one to make fires on that day—the instructions he .gave for that days work was to fetch posts and rails from the btijh for a new garden ; this was also proved by the evidence of his son, anil another witness which olosed the case. Tho counsel severally addressed the jury on behalf of their respective clients—and His Honor pointed out to the Jury that they h:»d to find whether the lire which occasioned the loss of the plaintiffs property was ignited by or caused to be ignited by the defendant orders, and if so to what damages the plaintiff would be entitled.
■After a shcrt retirement the Jury found a verdict for the defendant."
This case occupied the ceurt from the morning till late in the evening. .: The Court was then adjourned.
HOW AND WHY THE RADICALS LOST SUPREME COURT.
Wellington Independent, Volume X, Issue 1310, 28 July 1858, Page 5 (Supplement)
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.