The Dorset County Express and Agricultural Gazette.
Dorchester, Dorset, England, 1883-04-17 00:00:00

COUNTY COURT.

TIJOIDAY.
(Before Mr. Serjealit TINDAL ATIIIIII0S.)
JITDOXINT 8011INIONSO.

C. Jeffery v. J. H inley.—Claim for repairs.—
Plaintiff he • gunsmith of I),rchester. and defendant •
veterina-y surgeon of the it 11. A., now residing at
Weymouth. He was described in the summons as s
gentleman. which his Honour said was • large term,
and comPrabonds many Phases. What evideoce was
there of ability to pay?—Mr. Jeffery said he had
enquired at the Barracks, and had ascertained he was
In rea ipt of full pay.—His Hmour, however, was
Informed the law had the defendant in another grip;
an execution was taken against him • short time ago.
Among his elfecte was a horet—Order made for 20
days, warrant not to issue if paid in two Instalments.

MOW/. Mllledge (execution creditors) V. Michael
Hail (judgment debtor). There were two claimants, by
an loterpleader, viz., Mr. William rather. Coles (as
trustee under the will) and Mr. George Kum ,(the
latter as liquidatioo trusteo).
Mr. Weston appeared for the claimants, and Mr.
Howard for Messrs. Midodge.
Mr. Weston said his Honour would recollect at tho
last Court the oaae was adjourned in order that further
particulate might be 1490. They had now boeu
given, and he was now reedy
_to go into the cam. The
circumstances were these. Mr. Edward Shepherd, by
hie will dated October sth, 1851, gave the trustees,
Kingsbury, Woodhouse, and Colas, the whole of his
property in trust for his daughter, Ann Kingsbury
Hall, for life, and altos 4111 r death to her children. The
will was proved in the Blitudford Court on October
4th, 1839, and since then Mr. Kingsbury ant Mr.
?Woodhouse bedded, and Mr. Coles was the only eurvi v-
jog trustee under the will. SOON time ago, on the 9th
April, 1879, Mr. Hall, the husband of Mr. Shepherd's
daughter, tiled his petition for liquidation, and Mr.
George Norm was appointed trustee. The goods bad
been in the posee.sion of Mr.. Had and Michael Hall
ever since mail the execution. •Lr. Coles gave nudes
to the execution creditor., and the result would be the
, interpleader summons that day. He produced the
will, which wet made on October sth, 1851, and was
, proved in the Blandford Court. hlichael Hall having
riled his petition, they had delivered lists of the articles
claimed by both partite.
Ilia Honour: Dose Mr. Howard dispute the propaty
lithe will?
Mr. Howard s No.
His Honour: 1 shonld like to know in the first caws,
Mllledge and Cole, which of the items were in dis-
pute.
Mr. Weston : W. have given amp/irate list of emit.
hire. Hall recollects the articles as being in her and
her father's poriesesiou, and would identity every one.
Ann Kingsbury Hall said she was the wife of
Michael Halt, and Um daughter of the late Edward
Shepherd, testator. Mr. Coe was one of the executors
of her father's will. Upon her father's death she had
all the things in the house given to the &fluter., for her,
under the will. She was the only child. The things
had remained in her possession ever since, with the
exoeption of one or two things worn out. All the
articles lath. list (produced) were her father's,
Lu cross-mamlnation : She married 29th Juno, TA,
and had always lived in her meant house
husband was • timber dealer, and had been accustomed
I' buy large quantities. She had five daughters the
oldest 18. Her husband had left her for two 'ye...
peat, When he left her there was no deed of separa-
tion or allowance. There WM an execution
put in
before Mr. //Wedge put in, but the money we. not
paid that she was aware of. She did not know who
seized the goods. She was from home. She had men
Mr. Buyer onus at the house, but she did not pay him
any money, nor was he paid ernY 9tat she was aware
of. Her house belooged to Lird Rivers, and she might
say she had always paid the rent. She had no doubt
all the articles in the list (produced) belonged to her.
In reply to his Honour, witness said if any articles
wore out she replaced them, and not her husband.
Hie Honour remarked that it had been lately held
where a woman out of her own means replaced articles
of furniture, the property did not pass to the husband
under the old common law of posemelon.
Witness further stated among the other assets left
her were a public-house and interest of money. The
house was let for £l.B • year.
Mr. Howard remarked among the articles were some
rash chairs. Were they the same left by her father?
—Yes.
His Honour: There are Isom* rash chairs which have
lasted einem the time of the Saxons. (Laughter.)
Mr. Howard :Perhaps Mr. Poultry would give some-
thing for them. (Laughter.)
Witness said not one of the odic's@ on the list had
been purchased by her husband's money.
The other list was then gone into, and Mr. Weston
said Mr. Ewer claimed the remaining things under the

bankruptcy.
Mr. Howard wished to make an explanation. When
Mame. hii!ledge put in their execution they had a
general nodei on behalf of Mr. Hall claiming
everything, upon which be raised the objection at the
last court as to the rules of the C.,urt, by which full
details were necessary. These details had ;duce been
given. Then Mr. Weston in the meantime fired
another barrel at them by bringing forward Mr.
Enwir to claim what they could not claim under the
will. This claim would stand up ,n a different basis
altogether.
His Honour said it was certainly rather an unusual
state of things, but they ml 4 thread their way through
the maze al beet they contd.
Mrs. Hall was again calla I to identify the articles in
the other list. She recollected her husband filing his
petition for liquidation in 1879. The list of articles
W6B produced, and she testified that all the goods
epesified vrere in the hones at the time the petition
was filed.
Cross-examined: No one took possession of the
things. The two schedule. made up all that was in
' her bowie. All the things in the present schedule had
Mime been sold.
How
far

How do you amount for claiming seed potatoee so
.r bock as 1879, also the fl men In pot.?
Common muse would tell you that.
Mr. Howard: It is my common sense against your
oath. _

His Honour said it was quite clear it was a mistake.
Mr.
plants

11-0;;;;Fpii aid mit another " mietake," viz..
dents ; but Mr. Weston corrected Mr. Howard—it
was planks. (Lsagbtsr.)
Witness wee severely arose-examined as to the other
articles mentioned In the scbclule.

Mr. George —lnsTn. "We called, and stated he was
appointed trustee under the liquidation filed by Mr.
Hall. He had seen the property, said abandoned telt.
lug possession on the production of the will. The
estate bed never been wound up. The amount of debts
was £2Bl, and, after paying rent due to L ird Rivers
and other expenses, r tt-s and taxes. &c., there was an
outstanding balance available for dividend of £5. He
had made a number of en:pities, but bad not found
the bankrupt, who had not yet got his discharge.
Growexamined : He went with his clerk to take
an Inventory under the liquidation, but, on Mrs. Hall
explaining she claimed under the will, he abandoned
his claim till the institution of the present proceedings.
Rome things standing in an outhouse were removed to
Puddletown, and sold by his father.
Mr. Howard then addressed his Honnur. For
many years past this man, Michael Hall, had been
carrying en considerable business as a Umber dealer,
but he liquidated; but wh dher his liquidation made
him richer or not he could not say, although it was
• public opinion that two liquidations made a man's
fortune. do far OA his client was concerned, nearly
the whole of his claim was for hard cash, which the
bankrupt had from him in the year 1880. Upon this
they obtained • judgment in May, 1882. and he bad
been promising payment. but when they found he
did not pay they then issue I an execution to rcooup
themselves. When they did that they were served
with a general notice, claiming everything. No ,
details of any kind were given, but they claimed
everything as under the father's will. The " every.
thing" included used potatoes, plants, and also •
rick of hay, which they said belonged to the Isle
father—a rick of hay which would have been over
20 years old I This naturally ar Amid the sus.
pinion of his clienta, and he, at the I.st Court,
on their behalf, asked for particulate. If it had been
clearly prove I that the whole of the thing. were really
the woman's property, hie clout., evrn if they had •
technical right to it, would not have raised it, being
one of the oldest firms la the county. The inarticulate
were giv.n, and nothing at all said then about Mx.
Rowe. In order to save the expense of holding
ponies:don, they agreed that the gmcii should be sold;
and they realised about £6 or V. which was paid into
court. 'rhea in steppe jib, liquidation trowee. The
qoe.tion was had Mr. Ensor tine his doty, aa the
trtutte t . the seta's, in thus ahan.loning al claim to
the thing*? What was the efftct of • leg .1 abandon-
ment ?
His Honour: Tnat is for the creditor..
Mr. 'toward call the point he wee .zoing to put
was this—what waa the effect of a legal al. .n lonmeut
so far an his client was concerns! ?
His Honour .114 not think Mr. Riser wee so much
to blame, because there woo the will in nonagon.
Mr. Howard did not cast the slightes' r4ectiou
upon Mr. Rotor, but he wished to ask W. Heeoar if
there had been • legal abandoomsnt by a trustee
could he resume his claim, If it were 10 years hence?
His }lunar said there cmid be no laza' abandon-
ment of things rested In him IN trustee. There might
have been • lathes, for which be would be answer-
able. There cold ibe no legal abandonment—property
once vested, vested for ever.

Toe Ju* said the only question before him was
one of costs, and on that mint Mr. Howard had a
strong cue, and he gave judgment for the claimants,
without cost&

AIMED STARVATION or • PIG.

Jain.. Lovelace (Piddlebinton) v. Joseph Lovdess
(Piddletrenthide (—Claim £4 10.. 6J. —Mr. Howard
for pleintiff, and Mr. E. Burnett for a. to dant.—
Ddendant admitted this claim of £4 10,. 6 I. but now
claimed £7 154. or low of • certain pi:, ,n I halms°e
of account on the purchase of some vet lii —From
Mr. Burnett's openinr, it appeared Mr. Lovelee had
• certain stock pig, which he lent Mr. Lovel ,cc, who
bad it for eight or nine monthe. At the end f that
Um* from iotormation received his clitt,t scot for the
pig, and he then found it half starred, had been
treated villainously, and was lull of iambi. The pig
ultimately died, and Mr. loveless sustained • lose of
£O3 So—Joseph Loveless said he reside let Piddietren-
thide lit 1878 be bad a boar pig, which he lent to
M Mr. Draper, his brother-in-law. r. Lovelace asked
him to lend him the pir, and he conse,te I at lon gth,
on the conditions that he should take particular care
of it, as it was • valuable animal. One of ho con.
dittoes& was that it should not sleep out of In nrs. He
kept it from six to nine months. From information
received, he sent for the pig. They gat it ha k with
difficulty. It was perfectly starved—wee not so
heavy by one half. It was " poor as • her ile." In
Jun., 1800, there wee same misooderetandin; as to a
certain account. Mr. Lovelace was pr-a n., an Ihe
admitted his liability• as to the pig. In September,
1880, he *old him eight sack, of vetches at a fair
oxaehet price—Si. • bushel The dispute as to the
vetches resolve' keen into this--Mr Lovelace,
who einnviained of the quality of the ve,chee,
would on y _ pay 7e. Meta ad of Ba—Mr. Love-
lies maid Mr. fiarnways bought some of the
vetches at the same pricm—Hl. Honour said it wall
almost a pity than csothenso did not mats to some