MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 583, 11 August 1909, Page 11

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before G;- Riddel, i.S.M.) r . ROGUES AND VAGABONDS. *.A • yoting 'man named Win.\Newniaix : Vas v dhirged ' intli; Jjcing a .'rogue • and vagabond •■ Vwithin the meaning of-the Police Offences -Act; 1908j';inx.that:.lievWas : found;,by^night" without i liivfiil.excus«,in a/stablo. ! ih. Wright Street.. . A : s.fdiil-ar'-;chargd, wes.prcferred against Elizabeth . Alliiwn-L\Vo^,-stated. to bq-,,bluAboth-.in. years ' andVcrimb v : :..N^e3V'nian/iwasysenteucDd- : :' to. _one ■ifldritli^;i imprisonment.: A\ ; science.;-of .three . months was imposed on Elizabeth AVood. ' . ' ; :S .' INSOBRIETY... ■ • A: : -rco6rd of 41 previous' convictions, ■ all for drunkenness, ■ ivero mentioned in the case: of Cairns, . who .appeared .on a'cliargo of. •' ■ insobriety. ?v "lt' • wair staVcd'.' that 7 a' proliibit ion ' order'., had" been ■ taken out agaiiist him in Sep-. . feSib'er, 1908,' but ho had bceiij ; siiice convicted.. Ei '-was ordered „to -'the 'Pakato'a Hoiuo for one year. •: • •. .■ ' :;Alibe Brown,, who had ;been preyiously donwas fin'idvifls.'f iiu''default: seven :days' imprisonment.' '. One l - first' offender;;-.was fined 55.,. with», an .alternative. of 2i .ho.urs,: ' v , CIVIL IHJSINiiSS. ; (Before Dr.. A. M'Artliur,' S.M.-)-for' plaintiff , by difa'uit'-'of'd'efeud-aiiit.i-was.V-given -.in- the following' undefended caSfei—Jiinette./AVardrop. Anderson v., -Thomas . Jb,sSt>h Al'Carthy, Jiffy cost? sEivls. Gel, l.AV.'and • G.\.'f lirnbull ajid:' Co.': v„.,S't>jtig. Lee, ~£3 9s. -id., cost!; XI 2s,';.'.the'.: trusteesOf;tlie New Zealand Oe'nttal District,'liidepepden,t' Order, of RcchabltesV'v. Thomas' Henry. Macauley,: J825, costs . Council v; 'Henry. A. Hurr,fell, £1 -lls.V-ioSts"ss'. ; the " Dairj'nian aiid Farmers'-Union Journal " Co,, Ltd., vl Andrew . Axijustus-Aiken, Jii 195,: costs' Ss,.; E. and. J. ' Wjiiiaiuson ». Thomas.Hodgson, JJ4 18s., costs 10i<; tk« Vlww-' ZeftUßd.Tiin.es.",' Co.,- Ltd., V. V. V, rt'iisouv -'jBS :13.. Sd„: costn "106.; .William iiiJj-i v. Laiirat Biiultou, J!3 l(k, costs IDs.; 'Tijjiii'iw v.'Walter Jell'erton .Leslie, £2 lioi-trt lU.'i Arlow and Co. v. William. H. . ixii!;,:, .ti II .cost,-, XI Odi; Harriett. Veter- . •»»«;•?*. !iydiicv\ O'lH'ien,' £i 18s.; costs lis.; l'Jii. ttuoMs' l-awli<r' v..: Williain Hardie King and''lda,King Robinson, Xil, costs Bs.; I'hi.Vkrt Kidding'v' •lfofoer.t' Hare, jW- Ik..- 3d.; VJ-j.f the ".Dairyman.,' and-Karliiers' -. liuitih Mpurrial.". 0o„ Ltd., v." Victor' Giraud, X.i Gs. costs lfe.;. Searie, 'Joy, and :Co.' v. Ciiaries .William Ritchie, £1 3s. 9a.,; costs Ss. JUDGMENT SUMMONSES. His AVorship iuad» 110 order in each -of the . foUdwm* "-jtidgiivent summons easesilaeky, • Lbgatt, and Caldwell v. Alice Cutler, a debt of ' '.&. : '--4d/i'v ; Janles' H, Russell -v. Edward . Henry -Etob'i'-n- debt of £0 2s. 9d.- • ' LONG CASE':' stORT JUDGMENT. His- Worship, Dr: M'Arthur, delivered '. reserved judgment in the,ciiso-.of-Aaron Samuels ' and ' GeOfgo AVilliaim Qray t - trading as the

Wholesale. Woollen Company (Mr. Levvey), t. Arthur William Norman Goocic, F. W. Vare, W. ,F. Thpmpson,.. and_W. J. Scammell • (Mr. _ Luckie). 1 : 5 Tho plaintiffs ''claimed the simi 'of '.£BO, Ibo | amount of a promissory noto, dated November 27, 1903, made by the defendant Goode, and payable to tho defendants Vare, Thompson, and Scammell, or order, three .months after date, and endorsed ,by the same three defendants, to the plaintiff.-;, which note was dishonoured. The plaintiffs further claimed the shin of ,£1 for interest to the dato of judg/ill&llt. "The caso, was long," said his Worship, "the judgment will ;be short." Ho was satisfied, ho continued, .that the noto was' not given for tho. accommodation of, ono of tho ' plaintiffs, and that thero was no ; misrepresentation on the part, of tlio plaintiffs. In his Worship's opinion, tho note was signed by tho-maker, ono of the defendants, and made payablo. to the other three defendants, Who' endorsed it in consideration, of tho plaintiffs"refraining from taking- proceedings against tho maker, and all .the parties wero well aware of this. The plaintiffs were holders in duo course. There had been a detriment to tho-plaintiff's sustained ■ for the sake, and at tho instance, of( tho defendants, and a benefit to the defendants, moving from the plaintiffs. Either of theso would constitute'a valuable consideration. Judgment' would bo given for plaintiffs. ' THE "TEAM" SYSTEM. .. . ; 1 The Wellington Tailors' Industrial Union of Workers (Mr A. H. Hindniarsh) claimed £10 < from- Kjrkcaldio and Stains, Ltd. (Mr. A. L. \ Herdriian), as a'penalty for an alleged breach of tho tailors' award. A similar claim was preferred against S. Garshwok, one of the firm's ' tailors. It: was alleged by the plaintiff union- that the defendant firm had employed gtels to work with Garshwok on the "team" system. ' Mr.-Herdman, in outlining the case for tho defence, submitted .that no breach .of tho award ' had been- committed. Surely, a firm. ../as, not barred. from , giving .one •of - its employees assistance iir. a time'of rush." Tho actions .of-defendants did not constitute a breach, of the award, asthere had really been no "team . system;"- In'his; opinion, there would bo "a 'breach of the award only wkeh< , there, was* a'systematic working of teams, at all', times. Jlr. Herdman also raised a technical' objection to ; tho effect that tho pro-ceedings:-had not been authorised by a meet-, Ing of tlio union, but staled- that lie would riot press. this objection as. defendants: wero atall times desirous of. securing an!interprcta- • tfon of. the award. , . j V- His Worship ,reserved his decision- till August , ."12. . v " . : ' (Before Jlr. W. G. Kidtiell, S.M.) •" -i A QUESTION Or PARTNERSHIP. ; ,'i-A claim for. ,£IG. Ms.;lld. for goods supplied was "preferred by Henry G. Clarke-(Mr. Arnold) against A. li. Temperton and John Caiup.bell,' lately trading, as Tomperton and. Campbell. Tho; case had- been.,calledon previously, when judgment: -by' default had been given against .defendant /Penlperton,'and the claim against' Campbell -held been adjourned. Defendant Campbell >now: denied liability for tho, amount,.--stating/that lie was never in'.partnership with Teiipertoiil ; His. Worship held ; that'Campbell's- actions had been such: as to 'lfcadi persons, to believe that he was a part- : per,- .and, therefore,-'accorclinE ;to the' Partnership Act, he must b'o'treated 1 as. ouch. Judgment: would ba.for. plaintiff against the part-. Mr-ship, witi.ic'osts 9s.' .