103
had been allowed in the Registry to file pleadings in defiance
of that Order and a Summons was sent in to me, from the Registry.
to hear, as to issuing a Commission to Japan to take evidence. 1, personally, had to find out these irregularities and they have since been corrected and the pleadings re-filed, after pay-
ment of the necessary extra Court fees. In my opinion, the Summons should not have been sent in for hearing till security
had been given and the papers were in order.
Action No. 91 of 1901. This was a complicated suit dealing with the distribution of a large fund. This had been dealt with and distributed under various Orders of Court all but $6,464.24.
A Summons was taken out asking me to deal with that Specific balance. On going through the papers 1 discovered that a letter had been put on the File of Proceedings, from one of the Solici- tors to the Registrar, saying "Our clients lately paid to us the sum of $929.86 which belongs to this Society. We think it should be added to the Fund in Court and shall be obliged if you will apply it accordingly and let us have a receipt".
Without any application to the Court, or any affidavit or
anything to show why a balance of trust money in a Chancery Suit should be added to in this way, or why the money had not
been paid or mentioned before, the Registrar acting as he says "ministerially", files the letter, the money is paid through the Registry into the Treasury and the Treasurer's receipt is given and thus a trust balance is swollen by $929.86. The affidavit of the other Solicitor in support of the Summons only mentions the smaller balance and, if I had not gone through all
ve the papers myself before the Summons came on, I might had made a formal order mentioning a wrong balance and a serious muddle might have occurred. In my opinion, the Registrar should not have allowed that money to go to swell the balance, without
consulting