MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 582, 10 August 1909, Page 9

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

' A CONSTABLE'S UNIFORM.

:pkor6.;Mr. W..G.Eiddell,-S.M.) ;, •:/.• A fiENCONT.BE WITH CHINESE. Two'Wiim«Vj,.t'CH : arfeiP6aTSon;and Augustus Abraham's,^Mr-haired.', and foreign •in ..speech, were .charged■.with'.assaiilting two Chinamen,' Job ' Chong'-.aud Joe' You, ?in Haining .Street. They. ;.pleade'd.'not; guilty,/and, stated, that. they vjare only. "having a lark"; with; tho Chinese. His' .WwShip • fined Pearson 20s. and costs. (7 s.; 9d.), 'ill' default' seven - days;' and " Abrahams 40s; and c»sts (7s.' 9d.), : -in , default .11 days./ 'HOSTILE'WITNESSES.,;. -A" charge of, on August 5, on the high seas,' wilfully.disobeying the'commands of .an officer, tlrefemd against. James;. Pentlartd,' ..was' again, broughr forward.' Accused.,had- been.demanded en^iktiTday. tO--'ehablo; him • to:'.'caU-eri'deiice in support- of; iiis dass, but- when .'the first' witness was. oalled,- his as • not - what, accused eiraetiri. -lHe,' therefore,' declined to'have, his other-' witnesses' examined.' A. sentence' of 11 darß* imprisonment was'-imposed, accused to be placed'on;,hisship,'; the ,Ath'eiiic,; if she sailed | before:■ tliQ-coinpletioxi. of the- term; . He ./was also ordered to pay costs (i£l Bs.). A GREY CITY AFFAIR. . / ■ ':Two young men named \Vitlir(m Brown arid Richard MCaiir. were charged•,%yith assaulting Thos: Joseph Mahon and'robbing him of the sum of *81. Evidence was called to . the effect thait the three men'had been drinking together, and'later, outside an hotel, tho two y accused assaulted llahon and robbed him of the sum mentioned., .. . - : .'Accnsod pleaded not guilty, and were: comaitked to'the'Supreme'Cdurt for trial. . THE WILLIS STREET CASE. ' A youth named Richard'Thos. Power, alias ' Ricnard Francis, was charged > with committing a-sOndi. of. thefts. .The charges, each of ,which 'save • (lie last' involved breaking and entering, wei'ii as follow :-Kl) Un May 26, breaking and eiitVnng the premises of'lnglis Bros.,.with iu-ti-Vsi ty commit.a crime;.(2) theft on July 9of ii.Hl.-i valued at. 85.,,. the property of Joseph. toi'Ualw; (3) theft on, July 11, of 41. .the pro- . pS'Ay of Amelia' Thompson; (I) theft on July Zl'utVlsi and one purse, of a total value 0f,55., tlj- property of f., J. W. Fear; (5) theft on Ju-.i- 23 of is., the property, of E. J. W. Fear; (i-jA'wmking and entering the premises of the Gear ..Meat Company, with intent to coinmit-a cniiuv; ('i) theft on July 31 of, goods to the •"value' of .£5, the property of Sutherland and. Rankin";" (8) theft on August 1 .of £1 25., the property of Chow Boor; (10) theft on July 7 of-i'l 75. ; 10d., the property of T. G. Queree; (11)- on' July 30 stealing £1, the property of Jr.o. Frasfir. ; ■ ~ ~ , ' Accused pleaded guilty to th© last charge, and' Avas remanded for. sentence to ' August 11, animilaT remand being granted in-each of the other cases.- . ' *

-• •AV-hilst under-the - influenco of liquor; Henry Smith assaulted, a police constable and damaged the latter's trousers. On tho chargo of drunkenness, to which accused pleaded guilty, ho was fined 10s., in default IS hours imprisonment,- on the cliargd of assaulting the constable, which ho did not' wnwmber, a nno of «£3, in default-14 'days'"imprisonment" was imposed, and on the chargo of damaging tho constable's uniform ho was ordered to pay for tho dam ago done, 225. Gd.j or go • to gaol for seven .days. ' .' INSOBRIETY. : . Spsan• Cowman' was fined 10s.. in -default 48 "hours' imprisonment for'insobriety, and ~2, in default seven days' imprisonment for refusing' to quit licensed: premises. - . • One first-offendiug inebriate was .convicted and discharged, aridthreo others wer© fined 10s. each, in default 2i hours', imprisonment. CHARGES OF THEFT. / ■ Tho alleged thefts. from: Messrs. Stewart and Company, formed tho subject Wm. Jas.. Howard was charged with the thett on or about March 1 of goods to the vqluo of: £3 155., -and. Ghas. and-.AY.-J. Aoraaii were jointly charged with, on or about March 1, stealing goods to the. value 4 of «8 3s. lOd: : Each accused .was , remanded to August, 11, bail being allowed cach_ in tho sum of i£so,- and two . sureties' of >E25. ALLEGED'TRESPASS. " ' ■ Tho .trustees of the • Wellington Racing Club; throsgh Jas. Walden, prosecuted. Daniel M'Leod ior alleged trespass on the Trentham Knoecourss on July 17. Mr. 801 l appeared for the prosecution, and Mr. AVilford for the 'defence. Decision was. reserved. . . _ MAINTENANCE. '. " ; IVrfailing to comply with an, order {or the maintenance 4 of his wife, ■ Henry Davy was convicted, and sentenced to 21. days imprisonment, warrant to bo suspended so long as «1 a week is paid off the arrears. , :4 ' 44 : : .OTHER CHARGES. On a charge of indecency in AVillis Street, a yoiihg man; named Archibald Boyd con.victe3, and. fined. X 5, in default .21 days . liiir. prisonment. ; ' ; A plea of guilty Was entered by Wm. Rads-, ; ford : to a charge of using . obscene language. He'.wasfmod ,£4, and costs tey'-in-'defaolt 14 days' imprisonment. - . George Leopold' Schnltz, who was convicted on.'a similar , charge,', was fined ~£3, and costs 235., with the same alternative.. . Duncan M'Diarmid was,convictcd and fined 205., in -default' seven days' imprisonment,;for disorderly conduct. On a second chai'go of Rising obscene < language, he was fined. .-63, with an . alternative of 11 days' imprisonment.

CIVIL IHJSINESS. (Before Dr. A. M'ArthuiyS.H.) ■ NORTHLAND TEST CASE. Reserved, decision was delivered by his Warship, Dr. Arthur/ in tho case of the KaronBorough Council (Mr. His'.op) v. Clias, Andcr-. son '(Mr.. Martin). , This was in tho nature of. atest case, to ascertain whether the Northlandratepayers- were liable: for special rates struck, at n time when the district in which they liv«dformed part of the Karori Borough. Special rates were 'made by tho plaintiff corporation by special order in respect of .'certain special, loans. On April 2; 1903, the district of.North-' land was, by Order-in-Council, cut off from the Borough of Knrori arid joined to the City of Wellington. On November 11, 1908, a demand was posted to the defendant for-the rates sued, the rate-book being made up from the valua-. tion roll -supplied by.the Valuer-General for the period commencing April 1, 1908, on which roll the name of defendant appeared as owner and occupier of the land referred-to m the ■ rate demand. .. " - ■ , : No has been made between ,pe Borough of Karori and tho City or Wellington and no .agreement, was come to between tho two local bodifs within the prescribed period of three; months, nor has any .application been made .to the Gdvernor ,by" cither of the said local todies for the appointment of a'commit Defendant disputed his. liability..to pay tho special rates on the following ground's": (1) that the'; rate . demand did not show;;whej:her the rate's were demanded of him as- : o\viie'r. or occupier; (2) that the rate demand did ;not correctly show the period for which the; special rate's were payable; (3) thnttfpiafljpstnlent has, been made between the City of Wellington and. the Borough of Karori, as ' required by law; (4) that after the inclusiqn of tho .district of-Northland .in the City-..0f - Wellington, tho Karori Borough Council had no powei 1 to make or adopt a valuation roll or a i'ate-l;cok. over such district, or to demaiid. or recoveri'ates thereon; (5) that, pending the making of tho "statutory - adjustment, the /Karorißorough Council has no such power.'/ ■ .. i After reviewing the position,--and.-: quoting numerous cases and authorities, his . Worship held that the first defence could ndt-.be upheld. In regard-to'the second line of; defence— that the rato demand did'-not correctly .show the p&iod for which the. special.'rates -were j payable—his-Worship, stated that if 'this/.were j supported, it would,^withoutdoubt, -as -.stated ,by defendant's .counsel, bo '-absolutely fatal to the. claim. -The" rate demand* however-,- stated definitely the period .for which tho; rates were payable, and that period was correct, as also :was tlio amount demanded, therefore the demand . was not ; faulty. . The. third gronnd on which defendant disputed his liability was that ho adjustment had been made between the City of Wellington and the Borough of Karori, as required by law. "I am asked to conclude," ;stated his Worship, "that as no adjustment has 'the inhabitants of Northland lare freed; from liability for the special rates, 'and, ns a.corollary, that their liability willdepend upon the terras of ,tho adjustment. Is 'is not as' reasonable to conclude that until the adjustment is made the inhabitants of Northlaud'remain bound, under their old conditions, agreed to by 'them through the council of the ,old district?" Numerous authorities were 'quoted in. support of this opinion; . ' - Jn regard to defences 4 and 5, his .Worship ■held - that the Karori Borough Conner, had. Jpower to. make or. adopt a-- valuation. roll or. .rate-book over the' Northland district in tho 'circumstances of-the present c;ise, from tlio information supplied by the "Vainer-General, nn;l. ithot the j council had such power; pending--the making of the adjustment or. tho; making, ot an award. "In brief," concluded his Worship, "I do not- think that the inhabitants of the inew district are relieved of. the, liability placed ™on tlwm •' when .the . special. rate was struck, until there has been nn adjustment between the : old and ■ the/new districts, or until an . award has been'made, and'even'then they are linblfl ihnnld Ja- creditor's - interest be • -at — stake.'judgment wa3 given for the plaintiff corporation, with costs. -' ', ■ Mr. Martin gave notice of appeal. .

ALLEGED BREACH OF AWARD. ; . ' MRAIK IN A LARGE.,ESTABLISHMENT.'.' ' Hearing of Uio charges laid; against Kirkcaldie audi Stains, 'Ltd.,;and. a:number of'employees in connection with alleged breachesof the Cooks'.and Waiters' Award was continued yesterday afternoon. •The inspector of awards' claimed to recover from Mrs. Good-£s,as'penalty for an alleged breach of the Wellington Cooks' and Waiters .'Award, in th&t the defendant accepted 10s, per week as wages instead of i!l 15s.'(the award rate),'while employed as female head cook by Kirkcaldie and Stains, Ltd. _ An information was iilso laid against Kirkcaldie and Stains, Ltd., claiming .£lO as pen'alty for eabh of two alleged breaches of the Wellington Cooks' and Waiters' Award(l) Employed Mrs. Good as female head cook,fro>n February to July last and paid her only 30s. iper week, instead of .£1 15s.' as required by the award; (2) dismissed Mrs. Good merely;hecauso she was entitled to the benefit of the award. Mr. Eindlay appeared oil behalf of the inspector of 'awards, and 'Mr.Herdman for the ■defence. • , Miss Tendall, continuing her evidence, ■said that she dismissed . Mrs. Good for three reasons —(1) Because • she would not cook well, though she could; (2) because she was insolent to witness; (3) because shewas slovenly; (1) because she was not wocth 355., which she would have to be paid. To Mr. Findlay: \Vifcne6s-blamed Mrs ; ,Good as responsible for tho whol© of tho mischief, but that did not" influence her greatly in dismissing her. . . Re-examined by Mr. Herdman, witness stated that she often superintended cooking of dishes in tho kitchen, and the whole of the othor cooks were always under her supervision. ; Gertrude"Barker, head waitress at the establishment of. Kirkcaldie aud Stains, stated that Miss Tendall often did part of the cooking herself. Mrs. Good had latterly been unsatisfactory in her work and- behaviour. . Mary Ellen Geary said that Mrs. Good (after her services had been dispensed with) camo into the kitchen, and said that sho had been advised by Mr. Carey not to give notice,-but to wait for. Miss Tendall to dismiss her, so that they might "havo" Miss 'lendaU. :She had heard dissatisfaction expressed in regard to Mrs. Good's 'cooking*

Eva Ida Travers, employed in Kirkcald'.o and Stains's tearoom, said that the girlo used to shudder at the way in which' Mrs. Good used to dish up the orders. Margaret Hawthorne, inspector under tho Factories Act, stated that she had never regarded' Miss Tendall as the head cook. ' Elijah J. Carey, secretary.of the Ccoks' and Waiters' Union, deposed that Miss Tendall sent for liirn and asked who had complained. Sho (usked--if it was Mrs.. Sullivan, and witness replied "No," but ho decliuetl to answer when sho asked if Mrs. Good had laid the complaint. He had not discussed with Mrs. Good tho matter of'giving notice.- • . To Mr. Herdman: Miss Tendall told him that sho wanted n now coolc, but she did not ask<"' whether she could dismiss Mrs. Good. Miss Tendall said that if she had to pay 355., sho would get a better cook. . Elizabeth. Good said that she had been c<x>k at tho Kiosk, from the management of which she had/received a testimonial. To Mr. Herdman: The young ladies who had made certain statements- concerning her (witness) .were-not-speaking the truth. She suggested that, for the sake, of-'keeping their positions, tlieso girls had come-to the .Court and told falsehoods. There had been no dispute regarding-the, cooking ■ of rabbits.-except that 0110 day, when witness considered ' that some rabbits were not .good,. Miss Tendall .and she picked ont tho good'parts and cooked them. Witness was annoyed when Mies Tendall told her to bo. sure and put some water in the pot. Further hearing of the case was adjourned .until 'Thursday (.norning.