AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume I, Issue 50, 9 January 1877, Page 2

AKAROA RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Friday, January 5, 1877. (Before J. Aylmer, Esq., R.M.) WANDERING AT LARGE. C. Gutberlet was charged on the information: of Constable Ruffle, with permitting a horse to wander at large on Sunday, 31st December. There was no appearance of defendant, who was fined ss. and costs. CLEMENTS V. BEECHER. This was an action to recover the sum of £2 3s, for services rendered, by plaintiff in connection..with the late banquet, for which defendant was caterer. The sum of £1 18s had been paid into Court, and defendantdisputed the balance on the ground 'that he had not been accustomed to pay more than Is per hour for similar class of labour.

Plaintiff deposed that on December 13th he had been employed to work for Mr. Beecher, and on that day had worked seven hours; on the 14th he put in ten hours, and on the 15th eleven hours. On the latter day he had been at work from 7 in the morning, till 1' o'clock the following morning, for which he had only charged 15a. On making application to defendant for payment, he said that he would only pay 10s. per pay, irrespective of the number of hours worked.

By the Bench. —There was no agreement made as to the rate of pay. On the 15th I worked from 7 a.m. till 6 p.m., and for the hours I worked after that time I charge extra rates, which is the usual custom among waiters. Defendant said that he did not dispute plaintiff's . time—so hours—but the only waiter in the crowd whom he considered worth anything, was Alfred. All the other waiters whom he had engaged, had only charged him 10s. They had been employed from 3 o'clock in the afternoon, till the banquet was concluded. Plaintiff, however, had most religiously charged Is per hour. The plaintiff had informed him that he was a professional waiter from Melbourne, but he was a bad one, as lie did not know a. little bit about waiting.

Alfred Gaisford deposed, that he had only charged defendant 10s. for the services he had rendered.

By defendant.—l rent the billiard room from Beecher, and. I am under an obligation to him. I have been accustomed to wait at table,. my charge varying from 15s to 20s a day. I did say to you that I have been paid as high as £2. John Beecher, cross-examined by plaintiff . —lt is none of your business what the waiters first demands upon me were. The Bench.—You are bound to answer the question. Witness. —Well, Jacob, the Jew, wanted 15s, but I told him that I would only pay him 10s. I am not going to answer you whether my language towards Jacob was of a bounceable or threatening character, as I consider it nothing to do with you what I said to my waiters. Plaintiff said, that he could produce testimonials as to his abilities, which would prove that Mr. Beecher was incorrect in saying he (plaintiff) was not a first-class waiter. The Bench gave judgment for the amount paid into Court; costs to be divided. BLACKBEE V. HEWER. This was a judgment summons, calling upon defendant to show cause why a judgment obtained against him by plaintiff in the Resident Magistrate's Court, amounting to £15 lis, but owing to various Court charges, had since increased to £17 ss, had not been paid. Mr. Nalder appeared for plaintiff. Defendant said\ that he was not at present, exactly in a position to pay, but offered to pay £5 within a fortnight, and the balance by monthly instalments of £5. The Bench gave judgment accordingly, or in default, two months' imprisonment.