CIVIL CASES.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 867, 13 July 1910, Page 11

CIVIL CASES.

(Before Mr. W. R. Haselden, S.M.) . SEAMEN'S CLAIM FAILS. DINNER-HOUR. ON S.S. POHERUA. Tho Wellington branch of the Federated Seamen's Union proceeded against the Union Steam Ship Company claiming £10 penalty for an alleged breacli of the Seamen's award in that they worked several of the crew of the Pohorua during tho dinner-hour between twelve and one o'clock.

| Mr. W. T. Young appeared for the Seamen's Union, and Mr. Levi for the Union Steam Ship Company. Mr. Young said that tho Poherua arrived at Wellington from Greymouth at 6 p.m. on May 24 and berthed at the Railway Wharf. She remained moored at that wharf until noon on tho following day, when the moorings were cast off and tho vessel was shifted to the Taranaki Street Wharf. Tho mooring at that wharf was completed at 12.30 p.m., and subsequently the men were employed rigging coal gear at tho after-end of tho ship until ten minutes to one, when they were sent to dinner. Tho union's contention was that, in terms of Clause 34 of tho award, which provided that tho men shall receive the recognised and customary meal hours of tho port, it was encumbent upon the ship-oivncr to send the crew to their dinner at noon. It was further contended that, if the men could he worked until 1 p.m. before being sent to their meal, they could equally be worked till 5 p.m. or midnight. Evidence was given on behalf of the union with a view to proving the facts of the case outlined by Mr. Young, and also that wharf labourers wore competent to shift a ship from one wharf to another or to rig or unrig cargo gear.

Mr. Levi contended that the company wei-3 entitled to employ their men during tho dinner hour if advisable, provided proper overtime was paid. If too little overtime was paid in this particular . case, then a mistake had occurred. The Union Comoa'ny always treated its men well, and tried to keep not only to the letter, but to tho spirit of tho award.

Mr. Young pointed out that the men only received half an hour for their dinner, viz., from 12.50 to 1.20 p.m., and the sixpence overtime paid to the men, was in lieu of tho other half hour. His Worship thought that, v taking Clauses 12, 20, and 34 of tho award together, ■ tho right was reserved to the ship-owner to employ the men during the meal hour upon tho payment of schedule overtime rates. If he was wrong, tho caso could very easily bo taken to the Arbitration Court, judgment would be for tho defendant company, with £1 Is. costs.

ALLEGED SHEEP-WORRYING.

George James Mitchell, farmer, of Stokes Valley, _, brought an . action against Charles" Scagar, settler, of' Silvorstream, claiming £10 10s., value of 15 shesp alleged to have been worried and killed by defendant's dogs; also a further sum of £5 55., value of 7 sheep injured. Mr. C. 11. Dix appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. H. F. O'Leary for defendant.

It transpired in evidenco that - tho plaintiff and defendant are owners of adjoining lands at Stokes Valley, and the plaintiff alleges that two dogs belonging to tho defendant had worried and killed certain of his sheep, and ho sought to recover tho valuo of them. Evidonco was called to provo that dogs which lived at defendant's promises had been seen chasing tho sheep on a number of occasions. After a partial hearing tho caso was adjourned until 2.15 p.m. to-day.

MOTOR-CAR DEAL.

Further ovidonce was taken in the easo of Frederick George Butler v. Walter Williams, a claim for £50, including damages, arising ouo of an alleged breach of an agreement for the sale of an Argylo motor-car. Mr. P. \V. Jackson appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Blair for defendant. His Worship reserved his decision until .Tuesday next. *'

CLAIM FOR, WAGES.

In tho case of J. F. Mason . v. T. Richards, a claim of £1 14s. 6d. for wages alleged to be due, judgment was for defendant.

THE UNDEFENDED LIST.

Plaintiff s' woro awarded judgment in tho following undefended cases :—-Skcrrett and Wyllie v. Thomas Taylor and Alice Maud Mary Taylor, £10 195., costs £1 17s. 6d.; Hutt County Council v. Edwin J. Beavis, £3 19s. 7d., costs 175.; samo v. Bolmont Land Company, £3 2s. Bd., costs 10s.; Houlder and Henneker v. Annie Irwin, 75., costs 55.; Wynford O. Beere v. L. O'Connor, £13 45., costs £1 13s. 6d.; Wellington Amalgamated Society of Cooks and Waiters v. William H. Jeffries, £1 35., costs 55.; samo v. A. A. Garrard, £1, costs 55.; same v. Cyril Perry, 195., costs 55.; Urwin and Roderiquo v. Peter Hartshorn, £11 18s., costs £1 10s. 6d.; Town and Country Supply Stores v. Emily Dick- 1 son, £1 Is., costs 65.; John Norton v. E. T. Kennedy, £2 2s. 10d., costs 10s.: samo v. Fredoriek Hadley, £46 165., costs £3 65.; same v. T. K. Taylor, £11 14s. Bd., costs £1 10s. 6d.; Wellington United Furniture Trade Industrial Union of Workers v. Martin Francis Carroll, £2 65., costs 10s.; New Zealand Acetylene Gas Lighting Company, Ltd. v. J. F. Gleeson, £9 ss. 6d., costs £1 Bs. 6d.; same v. Miles and Ryan, £7 lis. fid., costs £1 3s. 6d.; Stewart Timber, Glass, and Hardware Company, Ltd. v. The Plumbing Company, £16 17s. 2d., costs 15s'.; Speight, Palmer, and Co., Ltd. v. Catherine Tutschka, £2 25., costs 10s.; Charles H. Jones v. Robert George Donaldson, £18 18s. lid., costs £1 10s. 6d.; H. Oscar Howett and Co., Ltd. v. Patrick Madigan and Elizabeth Madigan, £2 155., costs 175.; Hans Pauli v. Donald L. Turner, £1 4s. 6d., costs ss.

In tho case of M'Cormick and Co. v. Felix Carroll, a claim for possession of a watch and chain or £2 16s. 6d., judgment was given for plaintiff for return of tho watch within seven days, or in case possession could not bo had, defendant was ordered to pay- £2 16s. 6d. and lis. costs.

No orders were made in the following judgment' summons cases: —Frederick T. Boworbank v. Owen Gough, a claim for £3 155.; A. E. Ansell- and Co. v. Patrick M'Grath, £6 4s. 6d.; Isidore Solomons v. James Ives, £2 10s.; same v. Walter Sutherland, £1 14s.