TAURANGA R.M. COURT.

Bay of Plenty Times, Volume I, Issue 83, 18 June 1873, Page 3

TAURANGA R.M. COURT.

Wednesday, June n. [Before H. T. C parks, Esq., E.M., and Major Egberts, R. H.J Cinu Casbs.

Moorsom t. Earl. — This was an adjourned case.—-Harry Gardiner, settler, deposed: My thrashing machine, with two men and four horses were employed at Captain Moorsom's farm last harvest time 5 about 12 or 14 men were working* m the paddock at the time ; two men only were employed by me to wort the machine ; 1 am of opinion that the harvesting of a crop is only completed when put into a barn, or otherwise housed ; the work of feeding the machine is immediately connected with thrashing 5 thrashing could not proceed without men being present to feed the machine and unt’e the crop when thrashed; it is possible to work the machine with four men ; my machine was at work a week or possibly a fortnight ; I am not aware how many bags of wheat were thrashed j when I purchased my machine I received no handbook of instructions as to bow many men were necessary to work it; Captain Mooraom made an offer of 30s for some thatch, I believe.— By the plaintiffThe agreement made between Earl and yourself was, I understood, to the effect that the defendant should do all the labour connected with the c>op; I do nob remember the word “ harvesting” in the agreement; when I undertook to thrush wheat in this district J invariably supplied machine and four horses, two men, and winnowing machine; it whs do part of my contract to feed the machine or take the sheaths away therefrom ; X can .only speak from hearsay as to the terms on which Messrs Chadwick and Bon and Ellis Bothers thrashed wheat; I remember that the defendant agreed to pay you £2 towards thrashing the wheat.—By the Court; The work could not have been satisfactorily performed Without the assistance of the men employed by plaintiff; winnowing is not thrashing, but it is usual to send a winnowing inaetiino oa tb© ground ; stacking is certainly not appertaining in any way to thrashing; I thrashed about 280 bushels ; bagging should be done simultaneously with thrashing, in order to enable the machine (o go on with the work, but it would be possible to do the bagging work afterwa ds.—Moon stated tiist in March, 1873, be was thrashing for Captain Moorsom, who did not band down the sheaves, or take away the straw ; and he did not winnow the wheat; I was thrashing by the bushel; thrashing means doing the whole of the work until the grain is bagged ; I have offered to thrash wheat for you at Is per bushel.—By the A a " ree d to thrasb, winnow, and bag defendants wheat; mv agreement with you was also the same; it is possible for one man to thrash wheat, and some one else to bag it. By the Court; I understand by the word thrashing—thrashing winnowing, and bagging.—Robert Kirk', settler, deposed : I have employed Mr Gardiner’s thrashing machine this yer*-; I had In employ extra labour at the same time, to work that machine; the men I employed were all working in connection with the thrashing ; if I engaged with any person so thrash wheat for me, I should expect him to yie>d me a marketable sample, tree irom chaff, &e., properly winnowed, and bagged. —By plaintiff. You never undertook to thrash ray barley, but hired your machine to me; I found all labour but two men —the driver and the feeder. Defendant s;afccd that he had been a practical farmer all bis life, and the work of thrashing was always understood to bo winnowing, thrashing, and bagging.—The Court gave judgment for the plaintiff for £2, and half coats. BKHEHHSNa v. Baaiuem. Claim, £OB 12s, being damages alleged to have been sustained by the plaint l ß for illegal detention, by defendant, of scrip for 50 acres ofland ; £2O to twelvemonths’ hnes at Registration Offce for not Iffting the Crown grant, 12s ; to loss sustained by being unable to keep an engagement at Papakura Valley worth £/S £9B 12s. —It appeared that the plaintiff left the scrip referred to in the hands of Mr Samuels as security for a debt, and Mr Samuels hrd reiusrd to give up the documents uni.il this clai u was satisfied.—Mr Darby, for the plaintiff, stat'd that defendant bad agreed to give plaintiff credit without any seen )r ; this happened one day at Mr McDonald's hotel, when

Mr Samuel* offered „ '■'"‘•v' e*int% and plaintiff for £><h without -Si#y>— Bod ell deposed th4> be«ould have aoiS the lana m question on one octwkjn for £32, but Mr oamur’j declined to ban! over the title deeds until his demand was Sf.nsllpd ; land had not depreciated in value since Uat time j the section >u question was now fullj worth £35. —The defendant staled that he eoeerely regretted, for the plaint 18" a sate, that lb* matter had been brought into Cou't. Ho wa\ quite willing to »eltie the affair by arbitration Plaintiff owed Imn some money, and he held the papers according to agreement. eimn/y as security for payment of the same. He was quite ready to band the ptL , whon hi " demand was satisfied. i ill had never stated anything about an engagement at Papakura, and he never prevented £rT W K n,! , tbat Pn ß ft goment if he felt so Hichaed.-—Mp Ifopkm# Clarke stated that Mr *V 03U «’J? )a< V P-**d ioto Court, on & certain ocra* sion, £o on behalf of the plaintiff to stay a distress warrant being issued against him.—The Bench nonsuited the piainMff, Lake r. W atison.—This was another adjourned case. Iho particulars are of no public interest whatever. Judgraeot for plaintiff for full amount claimed and costs. This concluded the business.