Print preview Close

Showing 1933 results

Archival description
John Keenlyside Legal Research Collection
Print preview Hierarchy View:

617 results with digital objects Show results with digital objects

Augustus Pemberton

This series is composed of legal documents concerning court cases involving Chinese and Aboriginal people as both witnesses and defendants. The collection documents early relationships between colonial society and Chinese and Aboriginal individuals within a legal context in British Columbia and provides documentary evidence of those relationships including first-hand narratives from all participants. The documents reveal the way in which the 19th century justice system in British Columbia related to those people of Aboriginal and Chinese descent.

Consists of eighty-two files pertaining to charges against Aboriginal and Chinese individuals and all the supporting court documents. There are 340 documents from 1862 to 1891. Most of this material either passed through or was created in the court systems of the day resulting in sworn testimony giving first hand accounts of events. Some of the documents may have been interpreted into English by court interpreters. Judge Augustus Pemberton (1808-1891) was appointed the magistrate and commissioner of police for Vancouver Island by Governor Douglas in 1858 and served as a county court judge in Victoria from September 23rd, 1867 to January 14th, 1881. Pemberton oversaw all but fourteen of these charges.

Findlay et al v. Hazelwood King

File consists of four documents: writ; newspaper ad "Sheriff's Sale" regarding the sale of public house and saloon "Mousequetaries" in Victoria; (2) affidavit of J. King. Case regards Defendant protesting the sale of the saloon, claiming interest in the lease and goodwill of the establishment.

J. Drout

File consists of one document: affidavit of W. Muldoon. Case regards a statement of Deputy Bailiff Muldoon that J. Drout's goods and chattels have been sold for arrears of rent.

Raper v. Richardson

File consists of two documents: (2) Bill of Complaint; Writ of Summons; Notice of Motion; Affidavit of Defendant's Solicitor regarding a land purchase in Nanaimo. The Defendants had taken the money for the said lot but had not yet delivered the deed of conveyance.

Sayward v. Reed Bros.

File consists of three documents: Joint Affidavit of Davie and Jesse; Affidavit of R. Brown; Bill of Complaint regarding a previous judgment awarded to the Plaintiff for $4,948.73 for goods and materials provided to the Defendants who were constructing a "Cofferdam" in Esquimalt for the government of British Columbia. The Defendants have been paid for their job and are currently residing in England but refuse to pay this debt.

Wise and mcDonough v. Powers et al

File consists of two documents: Summons; Affidavit of the Plaintiffs regarding the settlement of the estate of H. Hogan, deceased. The Plaintiffs are claiming the goods and chattels on the premises of "Hogans Soda Water Factory" amounting to $225.

Ruck v. Ruck and Lampron

File consists of two documents: Motion for Directions as to Mode of Trial; Notice Regarding Rule 8. a suit for the dissolution of marriage on the grounds of adultery, brought by the husband against his wife and Lampron

Regarding G. Johnson

File consists of 1 document: Record of Writ Filed. Johnson has employed T. Davie to take proceedings against Captain Luow, Master of the American barge "Helena", in the sum of $30 for wages owed to him while employed as an "able seaman".

Turner et al v. Withrow

File consists of 4 documents: Writ of Summons; Affidavit of Service; Judgement by Default; Bill of Costs. Plaintiffs claim $113.11 principal and interest due to them as payees on a promissory note with the Defendant.

Towns et al v. Enterprise Corporation

File consists of one document: bill of complaint. Case regarding Plaintiff's were shareholders in Enterprise Corp., a mining company, and have various complaints that the calls made by the Directors for monies were not levied equally on all shareholders; the books of the company were being kept in a most irregular manner; and not general meetings were called.

In the Matter of the Land Registry Act 1870 v. Exparte L. Malatesta

File consists of five documents: petition; order; registration of charge against Malatesta; notice that no charge appears registered; affidavit of Malatesta. Care regards Malatesta, owner of lot 912, Victoria, does not hold the original title, the dispute is arising over the ownership of the peoperty and is settled in Malatesta's favor.

In the Matter of the Estate of A.S. Bates, deceased [3]

File consists of seven documents: notice/advertisement regarding the sale of Bates real estate; correspondence to C.E. Pooley regarding the purchase of property; affidavit of Isabel S. Mansfield; correspondence from lawyers in San Francisco regarding the estate; affidavit of C.E. Pooley; affidavit of L. Fisk; legal documents regarding the estate of Isabel S. Bates. Case regards the settlement of the estate and effects of A.S. Bates. See 19-10, 19-19, and 19-29 for more.

J. Bigne

File consists of one document: Certificate of Registrar of Titles regarding the southern half of Lot. No. 169 in Victoria. J. Bigne is applying to be the registered owner

Rudolph v. Loewen and Erb

File consists of 4 documents: Bill of Complaint; Answers of J. Loewen; Answers; Answers of L. Erb. The Plaintiff purchased the interest of J. Jungermann, jeweler, and with such purchase he assumed a debt of $1,900 due to the Defendants. The Plaintiff also took out a life insurance policy for $3,000 and offered this to the Defendants as security on his debt with them. Debts were renegotiated, the Plaintiff fell ill, and the Defendants then refused to return or reassign the life insurance policy back to the Plaintiff.

In the Matter of the Estate of A.S. Bates, deceased

File consists of five documents: colored drawing of the Bates property; correspondence regarding the sale of the Bates proerty; administrative report; affidavit of E.W. Blaisdell; correspondence. Case regards the settlement of the estate of A.S. Bates, deceased and sale of properties. See 19-19, 19-20, and 19-29 for more.

Wark v. Towle

File consists of four documents: exhibits A, B, and C, notices of intent to apply for transfer of license for property; affidavit of H. Wark. Case regards Towle carrying on the business of selling liquors by retail in a house. Wark in contention of Towle's license and the legality of his actions.

Gresovich v. Phillips

File consists of six documents: (2) Writ of Summons; Judgment; Affidavit of Johnson; Bill of Costs; Affidavit of Service. the Plaintiff claims $54.85 for debt and $12.50 for costs as the balance due on unpaid accounts

Newfelder v. Dulig

File consists of 2 documents: Writ of Summons; Affidavit of Service. Plaintiff claims $372.21 principal and interest due to him as the holder of a promissory note with the Defendant.

Sing v. Price

File consists of four documents: receipt; (2) summons; bond. Case regards an order of the Supreme Court that the sum of $700.00 be paid out to the Plaintiff.

Marshall v. Astrico, deceased

File consists of two documents: Petition to Dismiss Bill; Bill of Complaint. at the time of his death, the Defendant was indebted to the Plaintiff for $482.00 on unpaid promissory notes and various other debts and unsettled accounts between the two parties

Regarding Dietz

Affidavit of E. Johnson.

-E Johnson is the attorney for G.Dietz. Mr. George askew has applied to E. Johnson for a loan of $3500 upon a mortgage. Johnson believes that the proposed loan, to be advanced out of the moneys of G. Dietz, would be a safe and advantageous investment for him.

Mackenzie vs. The Corporation of Victoria

Summons; Exhibit "A"; Authority to Receive Money out of Court; Notice Record.

-The corporation's water works department laid water pipes on the Plaintiff's lands which then flooded his lands and permeated them with water, greatly depreciating his property value. The case was taken to arbitration and the Plaintiff was awarded $475 for damages or at the Defendant's expense, the draining and repairing of his property. The Defendants have not responded to the satisfaction of the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff claims $1,500 for damages.

Results 101 to 150 of 1933