MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 763, 11 March 1910, Page 11

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

THE FURNITURE .TRADE, ' PAYMENT •OF APPRENTICE. ' (Before Mr. W. -R. Haselden, S.M.) The . Wellington. . United Furniture Trades Union proceeded against Frederick Pierard,;formerly .a' furniture manufacturer. for not " paying an apprentice his weekiy wages, the union claiming a penalty of .£lO. Mr. E. J. Fitzgibbon, for the Union, stated that, the case ■was brought chiefly for the purpose of instructing the employer in his duty towards an apprentice. Where the master did not carry out his obligations to the apprentice, that apprentice was handicapped severely in after life, and the' trade - generally suffered. The award made special. provision for a. case of this kind. The employer had not-observed ! such provision. Mr! E. C. Levvey, for defendant, said, that a technical. breach of the', award' was admitted, but.the breach was brought about by the financial failure of the-busi-ness'in which the ' defendant was interested. This forced him, although not in l the trade,- to take charge "of the apprentices. Defendant endeavoured to place the apprentices with other Employers, and had succeeded in two cases. He also- thought, that he had transferred the apprentice in question, but ; some days later found that the boy had not gone ,to 'his new'/employer. ; Inconsequenee of." the" supposition mentioned he had Hot- paid the boy that week. The money,. however, had since been paid.His Worship, after questioning the boy,' fined defendant dC2, with costs £1 15s. 6d. '. TIMBER CIAIII Hearing of the case of tho Hutt, Valley. Timber. Company v. ;Richard Keene, a. claim/for ,£DI. 2s. lid. for'.timber..supplied to H. Hurrell, was continued. Mr! Ward appeared for. plaintiffs and Mr. Beere for defendant. From evidence it. appeared that, defondf ant was engaged in building two houses at lower Hutt, and Hurrell was doing the work., .The maiiager of'the - company alleged that defendant gave the company an order for the timber, which he was told by defendant was to be retrospective, and to include timber already supplied. Defendant denied that tho order li'as retrospective for timber supplied -'prior to this date. As. to timber supplied subsequently-to the day of the' Order defendant disputed its delivery in .terms of .the order. - Defendant alleged that timber; and material had been taken by Hurrell on the job, and put into other jobs which he was interested in. - After argument as to the construction and ; effect, of the order, judgment' was reserved.

CHINA SENT IN, ERROR.. . J. G. Raine took action against Alfred Francis Hawthorne, of .Whakatane, claiming for possession of certain goods alleged to have been wrongly sent, or £16,'' value of .same. ■ Mr. Wedde appeared for plaintiff. Defendants evidence was taken at Wkakatane.,' From the. evidence '...it appeared that plaintiff had sent a cask of china in error to defendant at Whakatane, who had paid freight 'and charges on it, and on demand for possession being made by plaintiff defendant, claimed a refund of freight and storage. Judgment was given for plaintiff and possession-of the goods, with costs £1 18s. : -.''■'.' . UNDEFENDED LIST. Plaintiffs were awarded judgment in the following undefended civil.cases:—Thompson 8r05.,; Ltd., v. Mary-Hewson, ,£1 lis., costs 10s.; Edward Pearce and Co., Ltd., v. William Edward Murrell, ,£1 6s. Gd„ costs Bs.; Te Aro House Drapery Company, Ltd., v. John Tofts, .£ll 3s. Gd., costs £1 10s. ' Gd;; Towrisend ■ and Paul, Ltd., v. Thomas Glostor, .£1 55., .costs 65.; Townsend and Paul,' Ltd.', v. Thomas A. V. Hudson, £1 lis;, costs os.;' 'Te Aro. House Drapery Company, Ltd., v. Samuel Thomas Evatt, .£2 7s. Cd., costs 10s.;" William Hendry v. Duncan Campbell, £1 10s. Gd., costs 55.; same v. Arthur Henry Vile, .£s'los., costs .£1 Ss. 6d:; J. J. K.. Powell v. Joseph Dixoh, .£l4 10s. 5d., costs .£llos. Gd;; Wholesale Woollen Company v. Albert Charles Hunt, .£3 17s. 6d., costs,. 125.; Henry .Ranish v. William Joseph Love, ,£3 155., costs. 10s.; Herbert Price v. Thomas Lambert, 16s. 4d., costs 55.; same v. Arthur W. Hawkins, 17s. Gd., costs 55.; Henry Savage: v. A. Southee, Ms'., costs 55.; Levin Meat and Cold Storago Co. v. William. Hawthorn, ,£3 18s. 2d., costs 125.; Sarah Fawckner v. Rebecca Messenger,.costs only 1 ids.; Sargood, Son, and Ewen, Ltd., v. David G. Morgan, .£4B 155.. 9d„. costs £3.15.;, - M. Banks, Ltd., v.- Horton's Manufacturing Company, Is., costs 55.; samo v. Boyd and Robertson, £2) 15s.i id;", costs 10s.; A. Adams v. Roland Hayes,'.£3 Is. 3d., costs 10s.; samo'v. Harry Hafrisbri, £3 3s. 6d., costs 155.; same' : v.' Abo 'Lewis, £2 .'l3s. Bd., costs 10s:; saino v.. William Pi'card, sen., 16s. 9d., costs' 55.;, same v. . Seabright Ambler,' £i lis. s'd.,,costs 125..■; i In the case Edwards v. Brand, defendant was, ordered to- pay. JE22 ,15s. and costs, and give up possession of tenement.

• JUDGMENT'SUMMONSES. Benjamin Houldey was ordered to pay John Keir the sum of <£3 • 9s. 6d. on or before March : 24, in default three days' imprisonment. H. F. Redwood was ordered to . pay. F. Hobbs afid Co. the sum of .£6 125., 6d. on or 'before March 24, |iti default - six . days', imprisonment. POLICE CASES. (Before Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M.) William Worthington, alias Green, was charged—(l) with having on March 1, at Dannevirke, obtained the sum' of <£13 from Annie Brown b.v melons of false pretences j (2) with: having; obtained on the same day two gold rings, l valued at ,£2O, from Annie Brown, I ,by; means > of false pretences. Detective liroberg asked' that accused be remanded to appear lit. Dannevirke on the following day. The; remand as asked for was granted. V Ruby Kirk, alins Trosser, convicted of insobriety, fras fined 10s., in default 48 hours' imprisonment. Sarah Jameson, found in a state of helpless drunkenness in Martin Street, and remanded ,for curative treatment on March 3, was convicted and ordered to pay medical .expenses amounting to ,£l, in default seven days' imprisonment. John M'Lean, also convicted of. insobriety, was fined £1, with the alternative of seven days' imprisonment. .