MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 666, 17 November 1909, Page 11

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before Mr. W. Q. Biddell, S.M.) POLICE CASES. Three parsons pleaded guilty to charges oi 1 vagrancy." Mathew .Pickering was; ..sentenced 'to' six months' l imprisonment, James Alexander Dnscoll, alias John, was Bept to gaol for ■ threo months, and GeorgßJArthur. Westray wis 'convicted and ordorcd -to come up, for pentenco if called upon. „ , _ . "A coloured man-named James Diggs stepped .into the dock to'answer a charge.,of assaulting George Grey,'andrrobbing him of .13s. 6d. Ho was remanded' until 'this day week. . . Ono first offending inebriate w&a tmed 55., m . default '24 hours'-imprisonment. ■ -....- ' TWO BOYS'iN COURT. •At a sittiAg of : the Juvonile, Court/two boys, aged 16 and 14 respectively, wero ( charged with -.the'.'.wilful damage of a quantity of fencing tittiber, valued at: 155., tho property of John . Gnthrie. Jhey .pleaded. guilty,- and wpre .ordered to pay -75.: fld. ■ each, to make good 'the damage,: m default 2<ll. hours' imprisonment. Soven days wero allowed . for-, payment;. ■;

CIVIL BUSINESS. (Before"Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.) v Judgment: by was given in the following civil cases:—Richardson andi.'Sons v,. Canr ning and Co.,■■£!,los., costs £1 3s. 6d.;iQcorge Doughty and Co. v.' Thomas ; E. Tait, £H .18s. Sd., costs 3s. Gd.i J.- 'E: Sutler, Ltd.; v. James Martin, J39 6s. -Id., costs 'Bs.; Whitcombo and .Tombs, Ltd., v.; Percy E. Baldwin, -jec 4s. 9d.;-costs 18s. 6d;; City, Council v. W. H. Newberry, £5- 13s. 6d:, costs Bs.; samo v. John James O'Brien, i! 5 4s.- lid;, costs: 3s. . v In tho .'judgment summons xaso/' William Moffatt; :y. : John William': J(ackay,. a v /debt- 'of £33 3a., no order was made.

, A MERGED LEASE. In a claim for rent amounting to 2d;, Panny Adair,-plaintiff;:(Mr. .Tair), against ■ Dennis M.Carthy,,defendant (Mr. Brown), Dr. M'Arthur.:delivered 'resorved'judgment. -'"'. 1 -Tho he' said, was that the lease had been merged in, the purchase, and therefore no ront _was duo. The .magistrate held that the merging; did. not .cover- any rent duo -prior- 1 to . tho . purchase, for which- some specific agreement was necessary. The Tent, on tho Apiti ; properw yras squared by an allownnco for fcncirig, ibut a 9 to tho Pohwigina property, ront wag .nMOy . claimed. Judgment was' given for plaintiff for JJSS os. 2d. and costa.

BRITISH' MERCHANTS'- CLAIM. The partially-heard case, Liffgins and Frocgatt v. Shaw, a claim for .£B9 2s. Bd., was concluciea. .loe plaintiffs aro manufacturers carrying on business in -England,: and the defendant is a • storekeeper , at 1 Mastcrton. -Tho ovideuco showed .that the; defendant-ordered goods from the ; plaintiils, thtough' an indenting . firm; butdeclined •to accept, and pay for thoci upon 'atriyarin the: Dominion.! Technical defences we're •SyvSft and his -Worship reserved i judgment. Mr.'D iX appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Cullen, of Masterton, for tho defendant. •

FOB WORE DONE. •i A claim .fot^Cl. 13s..f<>r • work> done• was' tho , subject of Charles Tandy, 'coaohbuildorijiplaintil! (MrviWard), ! i and Allen Orr. camo*/, , defendant (Mr. tfindraarsh). JJereadant cfiuntor-c aimed for J. 3 10s. for allem! defective wcrknVAnship'. •: -■ The caso'n as partly heard, and if ill bo cor duded at J/.45' this morniiiff.

BUSINESS IN LAND. " \Beforo Mr.yf. GrKiddcll.'-g.M.)

Deserved judgment vas'glvonjby 'Mr. Riddoll :Eaßt • and F.: E. East,plaintiffs (Mr. Young), v. .Ernest E. Middlemiss (Mr. Vmdlay). ' Plaintiffs claimed m from defendant, being balanco ot tommission duo 011' a property exchange.- defendant -counter-claimed for.. <£93 155., commission ; paid- to plaintiffs y by, . Haw-' thorne. tho owner of the property exchanged .for-that of defendant's, on the ground that defendant was not advised, by-plaintiffs that they .yrere/i acting agents'for' salo' and .yere ito bo ..paid a;' commission by him. After,quoting authorities commissions m,'-regard; to- direct/Isales to purchasers, the magistrate,referred to. theiduality of buyer and seller; in-,an exchange,. ahd said,that 'the evi-' hot .conclusiyo ;:that' plaintiffs told' defendant that .they wore to be paid a 1 commission by Hawthorne, or that they were acting Bpecifically^fts. his/flsents,/-but4tls-clear that e '^ ne y T th!n.!.wcre n(^ , agents, for somo vendor,-. ,whoh like, i prepared . to effejt,>an-; oxchan B e\of iprogerties.-. The magis.it miist be taken that defendant -knew .that plaintiffs, would charge and would receive a. commission' from'this vendor in the event.of an.exchanße.being/effectcd.- Judgment was. given for plaintiffs for..£.{(), ; wjth costs X 5. 011 the,counter-claim with' Security was Ssed at ,£lO over the amount of the claini and costs. ■ 1

TItAVELLEH AND AGENT.-

. < Mr. Riddell gave Ins.;reserved judgment inthe 'case'ibetiveen Edward /M'Ginty, plaint'flr (Mr. Dix) and, Granville Hunt, defendant (Mr. A, da B. Urandoit, inn.) „ Plaintiff claimed ill) 35., the amount of n cheque drawn by .defendant in' his favour, and defendant f coniitor-claimed for: „C 8 > 17s. 8d;, ■which, he alleged, 'had been:over-paid to plaintiff. ■: Plaintiff was employed by defendant as a commercial traveller, on - comraissioii..■■■: "Thcro is/' proceeded Mr.lvidttoll, ''a strong presunin* tion irlieii' money is paid, or a ehqquo given in a case.of this kind:tnnt the .person.paving his satisfied/.himsolf:--.. before;;, 'p'aytheftt;,; that.;;the amount if, nttnall.V: due, :niid the onus is upon defe.'daut to Di(«» Mm- rmf i

: After reviewing the ovidcnce, tlic magistrato continued;: "On the wliolo I nm satisfied that' deronaanl. naa failed to ostablish his countor' l JW'V,*' 1 ! 10 consider- that plaintilT is en- 1 .titled to -tho .£lO 3s. claime^l/ , Judgment was : givuu accordingly, with costs Is.

. TROUBLE ABOUT A LIFT. Bopairs to a lift bolonginn to Messrs. Townsend nnd Pnul was tho subject of a claim betweon Hutchinson nnd Campbell, plaintiffs (Mr. Blair), and It. Y. Wallis ar.d' Co., defendants (Mr, W. lI.D. Bell), tho.amount of the claim being .662 lis. 2d. ,_"Tho ease," commented his Worship in nivinff his rosorrod judgment. "is an unsatisfactory one, but this is due in tho first, place to tho failure of the plaintiffs to ascertain exactly what was required before commencing the alterations, and in the second place to tho failure of both parties to make some memorandum of the contract between, them." . Judgment was gWen for. plaintiff lor £27, witli costs <£4 2s.

CARRIER AND CLIENT. . The Colonial Carrying Company of New Zealand (Mr. Neavo) proceeded against George W. Van Slyko to recovor 18s. sd. for the removal of furniture, etc. ; Defendant contended that the charges were oxcessivo, but ho: produced no : evidence in support of his contention. Any decision, said his Worship, . would be unsatisfactory whero most of the evidence was on ono side, Some of the litems wore reduced, others struck out, and on the, remainder, judgment was given for plaintiff for sE3 lis. 8(1,, in addition to tho ,£lO paid into court, with costs £325. . :

BREACHES OF AWARD. AN EMPLOYER'S GOOD- HEART. Dr. M'Arthur gave judgment in tho award case, Wellington Iron and Brass Moulders' Industrial Union of Workers, plaintiff (Mr. Wilford), v. D. Robertson and Co., Ltd., defendants (Mr. Young). ' : Plaintiff claimed two penalties of ,£lO each for breaches of the award, the company having employed two men named , M'Naughton ana Kirby, non-memberS of the union, when members were available. , , . ,The,employment book, ; his\yorship.said, was not examined; and defendant "Simply employed the two men without any regard to the right of members of'the union to prior employment. M'Naughton could havo joined the union, but ho had not (lone so, even, after a lapse of four months. Tho defence.in his,case was untenable.;: Kirby, however, : was engaged ' for one week only, and the reason for his employment did credit to Mr., Sohertsoh's ;go6d. heart, oven if/his nctiorif were technically a breach of-the award. - There was no attempt-.in - either. case ■by tho defendant to benefit pecuniarily,: as in each case .ho : paid' over the award rato. ' His Worship ; concluded: "I, cannot , look upon M'Naughton's case as a slight breach, and/mSict a'penalty of . jes, whereas m Kirby's case I , think-' it-'sufficient to record a breach without inflicting a penalty." ,