DISTRICTCOURT, HAMILTON. Monday.—(Before His Honour District Judge Smith.)

Waikato Times, Volume XXII, Issue 1801, 22 January 1884, Page 2

DISTRICTCOURT, HAMILTON. Monday.— (Before His Honour District Judge Smith.)

IN BANKRUPTCY. On the application of Mr O'Neill, orders of discharge were granted in the cases of Henry Tristram and Ivwin Lovett. Barugh v. Hammond. This was an application by Mr J. J. Barugh, one of the creditors in the bankrupt estate of Beauchauip Bros., to have thetrustee,T. C. Hammond, removed. Mr Barugh, sworn, said he had been appointed by the creditors to overlook the trustee at the first meeting, but Hammond had never given him any information. The fact was the whole of the creditors were dissatisfied with the trustee. He was so unsteady : he was continually getting tipsy, and the creditors did not know where ho got the money for this dissipation. At the last meeting of the creditors he was tipsy, and could give them no satisfactory information. The meeting was held on the 19th December, and the resolution to get the trustee removed was carried unanimously. Mr Hammond said the facts of the case were very simple. The act made it imperative that the trustee should call a meeting of the creditors within six months of tha first meeting. He had stated in his report that no dividend could be paid until the 18th January, on which date he expected to get £1850. He had applied for the money, but had not got it. Mr Birugh, cross - examined by Mr Hammond : I know nothing of the New Zealand Bankruptcy Act. Have had convernation with Mr Hume, but cannot , recollect the particulars. I know you *p-|' plied for the £1850. Mr Hume has not*" put me forward to unke this application. In answer t.> the court Mr Barugh said he had several witnesses to call to prove that the creditors were dissatisfied with the trustee. He then called Mr Hume, Mr Edgecumbe, but none of these gentlemen were in court. [Mr Hume was sent for, and came at once, but owing to some misunderstanding the case had been dealt with by the court before he airived.) Mr Barngh then called Bernard Coleman, who said he would rather have nothing to do with the case. He was quite satisfied with things as they were. Cross-examined by Mr Hammond : The estate owes me £380 odd. You have my pioxy, and I am satisfied that you are doing your best in the interests of the creditor?. Mr Barugh : All I can say is that the creditors who have put me forward in this matter have behaved most shamefully, and none more so than the last witness. His Honour : I sympathise with you very much, Mr Barugh. Mr Hammond then put himself in the box, and on being sworn, said the estate so far had realised nearly £GO, and the payments amounted to about the same. He had made application to the New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Company for £1850, due to the estate on Friday last, and had received an answer from the agent, Mr Hume, to the effect that Mr Shriinpton's bond to Messrs Beauchamp had been assigned to the Loan Company some three years before. The fact of the matter was, lie was fighting large monetary institutions, and they wished to get rid of him. [The minutes of the meeting held on the 19th December were put in.J He held 17 proxies at that meeting against four votes, and yet the meeting carried the resolution against him. Mr Barugh remarked that with the exception of three, the whole of these proxies had been withdrawn. His Honour said the applicant had not shown sufficient exube for removing the trustee, and the application would be dismissed, with costs ss. Mr Hammond : What about my expenses. The Clerk : The 5s lepresents your expenses. Mr Hammond : I thought professional men got a guinea a-day. CIVIL CASES. W. A. Cowan v. J. W. Thompson. — Claim, £00, value of two horses fatally injured while in the defendants charge, and by his negligence. Mr Hay for the plaintiff. The defendant did not appear. Evidence was led to show that defendant had hired the horses to harrow ; he had left them standing in a field by themselves, and they becoming restive had got foul of the harrows, to which they were harnessed, and so sustained injuries which resulted in their death. The horses were valued at £40, and the the plaintiff claimed £20 for money paid for hiring other horses, and loss and inconvenience. Judgment was given for amount claimed, with costs, £13 Bd. W. J. Hunter v. Biskeville.-- Claim, £22 Bs, amount of dishonoured cheque, with interest. Mr O'Neill for plaintiff. Judgment, by default, for fall amount, and costs, £6. Hugh Ramsay v. Henry Lewis. — Claim, £60 18s, for work and labour done. This case was partly heard, and adjourned till 9.30 o'clock this morning.