The Inangahua Times, PUBLISHED TRI-WEEKLY. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1883.

Inangahua Times, Volume VIII, Issue 1315, 26 October 1883, Page 2

The Inangahua Times, PUBLISHED TRI- WEEKLY. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1883.

The case of Dickenson v. Card, which, 1 in one form or other, has been before 1 •he public for nearly a month past, i has at length been disposed of, and affords another illustration that the j law is an edged tool, and a dangerous ■, weapon for novices to play with. The circumstances of the case were in * many respects peculiar, and a short y history of the action, and the circum- ' stances leading up to it, may not be without interest, if only as a salutary r warning to those who, likp the plantiff, l are disposed to put a too abiding trust * in that delusive branch of jnrisprn- c deuce which on the goldfie'ds falls n under the very appropriate denonritta- c tion of "busli law." The facts are n briefly as follows : — A Mrs Irvine some | v mouths ago commenced business at ' t;

Joatman's, as a fancy-gd.ods dealer, ihe obtained her small stock on credit rom Mr Dickenson, who is a stationer, n Westport, giving him as security a rill of sale over the goods. She, howjver, required money to enable her to !omplete the erection of her premises,'. md to this end obtained a loan of some £50 from a person'living in Nelson, igain giving as security a second bill if sale. Time wove on, but the g 1 owth \f business, it would appear, did not :eep np with the needs of the situation, ii?d Mrs Irvine was eventually sued in he Magistrate's Court by several iraall creditors, and, suffering judgment n go by default, distress warrants were n the ordinary course issued against ler. In the meantime, however, Mr Fones, acting as solicitor for the Nelson nort<*agee. levied under his bill of sale, jlacing the bailiff of the Resident Magistrate's Court in possession. Mr Dickenson, the We.stport morfgagee, jb.or.tly after appeared upon the scene, irmed, of course, with his security, and proceeding to Boatman's, managed to steal a march on the bailiff. As a rule it is pretty hard to steal marches on aiiiffs, and particularly West Coast bailiffs, but in the present instance, that official, relying upon the belief that his possession was undisputed, a belief he had een very reasonably led into from some communication which had actually passed between Mr Jones and Mr Dickenson, happened to 'cave the premises tor a couple of minutes, and upon returning found his "duds " had in the interval been bundled unceremoniously into the street, the doors locked against him, and another person in possession. This " other person " turned out to be Mr Dickenson, who, in the full belief, it is to be presumed, that he had scored nine points of the law, had shut himself up like an oyster and oid defiance to his enemies. So far victory seemed on the side of " bush law," and after a convenient lapse of time an auctioneer was brought into requisition, and the form of a sale of the property gone through. But the wily limbs of the law slumbered not. At the sale it was announced that the title to the property was in dispute, and the purchaserof.it mighl safely count upon buying into a luxurious law-suit. This intimation seems to have had the desired effect, for all the eloquence of the auctioneer availed not, and the premises were eventualh knocked down to Mr Dickenson himself, through an agent. It is from this j point that the real interest begins, but the inequality of the contest between the rival claimants very shortly afterwards became apparant. Mr Dickenson, doubtless lulled into a sense oi security by the form of sale gone through, thought he might safely venture out of his shell, and - this he accordingly did, but, as if still apprehensive of 'ad weather ahead, he took the precaution to have all the doors and windows '-arricaded, and this done he visited Reefton. Now came the opportunity for the "other side." A man was accordingly sent put to Boat man's, and he, finding th&- premises with nobody to. take care of them, managed without Molestation to effect an entrance, and ;ihl;rthiß manner the former possession ■ wafe regained. The sequel of the case unfurnished in our Court report. MtfJHckenson brought an action for forcible entry, but although Mr Haselden was then engaged, and fought, tb,e case with undoubted ability, the charge broke down from the simple Jijnfc certainly very cogent circumstance," which had been entirely overlooked by Mr Dickenson when laying the information, that the hou^e was built' on a public reserve, and as such gave no title to prosecute upon such a charge. Mr Jones has therefore adroitly lauded himself in his former possession, and Mr Dickenson finds himself out in the cold. It was a case of diamond cut diamond, and although Mr Dickensou can hardly be blamed for endeavoring to do the best he could for himself, the.means he adopted were not such as entitle him to much sympathy.