Oath, against Oath.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume V, Issue 650, 22 August 1891, Page 2

Oath, against Oath.

A ROUGH REFERENCE TO GISBORNE. A little case that has a good deal of interest centred in it was heard at the R.M. Court on Thursday morning. G. J. A. Johnstone sued Joseph Cresswell, solicitor, for £7 10s, Mr Jones appeared for plaintiff and Mr Rees for defendant, Mr Jones, in opening the case, said that the dispute arose from an arrangement in 1886. Mr Johnstone wae correspondent for the Weekly Advertiser, and Mr Cresswell for the Mercantile and Bankruptcy Gazette, but Mr Johnstone used to do a good deal ot Mr Oresswell's work, and eventually the latter said this was not fair, and offered him_£2 10s a quarter. Mr Johnstone at first declined to accept the money, but after being pressed by Mr Cresswe’.l, who said that it was not fair one should do so much of the work and the other receive the pay, ths plaintiff had agreed to the arrangement, and had fortunately made a shorthand note of it in his pocketbook at the time- “* c Johnstons, knowing by the records of the Court that Mr Creaswalt was pressed for money, made no claim on him, but when about to get married, and understanding that Mr Oresswsll was doing a good business, he wrote asking him tor payment. Defendant did not reply to the letter, a second letter wae written with a like result, and later on he (Mr Jones) wrote a polite letter to Mr Grossweil, advising him to pay the amount, but ho had not the courtesy to reply to that. In regard to the excuse now put forward by the defendant, that he did not answer the letters because ot swindling claims he had received from Gisborne, one would think that when Mr Cresswell got a o’aim from a person in Mr Johnstone's position, he would at least have the courtesy to reply and make some explanation. Plaintiff gave evidence to the same purport as counsel in opening. Mr Jones said, if necessary, he could get an expert to prove the accuracy of the shorthand note, but it was not objected to. By Mr Rees i Apart from ths shorthand note he had no other evidence of the arrangement than his own knowledge. The note was not dated. It was not possible he aould have made a mistake about the £2 10s. Had at first refused to take the money, but Mr Cresswell pressed it on him, saying, it was business, and that witness did ths work, and was entitled to the money. After some persuasion he had agreed to the pffer. Mr Rceg: If you saw Mr Cress well’s oath saying he did not make such an arrangement, would you still swear the same? Witness: I have read the evidence. Mr Rees : And there could have been no mistake on your part ? Witness: No, I could not possibly be mistaken.

Mr Bees; This is one of those unfortunate cases where one man's oath is against another's. No doubt Mr Johnstone has a note made about the time. It will be for your Worship to judgeThe defendant’s evidence was that he had made no arrangement to pay plaintiff anything—that they rendered each other mutual assistance in the searching of records and transmission of messages. In cross-examination he said :—Never reported for the Weekly Advertiser. Never corresponded to any other Gazette except the Mercantile and Bankruptcy Gazette. Never asked the plaintiff to do any work for me in connection with that Gazette, more than that on many occasions he searched and transmitted telegrams for me, and I and my clerks did the same for him when he was busy. lie was under no obligation to do work for me. Eeoeived a notice to produce in this matter. Received a letter from the plaintiff, making a demand shortly before his marriage. Did not reply to It. Cannot find his letter. Have searched for it. Produce a letter which I received from Mr Jones, plaintiff’s solicitor, Did not reply to that letter. Received so many swindling demands from Gisborne that I could not afford the time to reply to them, Donlt owe this mopey and never did, Did not answer the letter because I have something else to do than reply to false claims. Deny this liability, Tofd plaintiff that I was paying my Gisborne creditors. Did not pay 'hem when I left as I lost between £3OOO and £4OOO in a fire, Re-examined—The plaintiff would be busy in his office, and I would make a search, and he would ask me to forward a telegram. Forwarded the information for him as diten as he did for me. Never made any claim on him for any eerviaea-whe never offered to pay me for my services. Mr Jones : I might point out several things in that which corroborate Mr Johnstone’s evidence. His Worship : lam satisfied—l will give judgment for plaintiff. Costs £2 13s.