MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1598, 15 November 1912, Page 9

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before Dr. M'Arthur, S.M.) „, ALLEGED TELEGRAM FRAUD. EXPORTER'S "PRACTICAL JOKE." There were some unusual .features in the case heard yesterday in which JameS Gowing Godwin, wool and skin buyer, Wellington ..(represented' by lit. Myers) sued Davidson and Co., exporters, Wellington (represented by Mr. Wilford) for 440. ... • ■ The following is a resume of Godwm s statement.of claim:— ■ . Shortly before August 20,1912, the plain-: tiff received instructions from fay ■ and Co., of Wellington, merchants, to attend certain sales at Blenheim, and to. purchase skins there as agents.for them. The plaintiff was to be paid 2 per cent, on the ..value of the purchases thus niade. Whilo •at Blenheim on August 20, plaintiff received a telegram, the body of which read:— An, Unsigned Tsjenram. "Avoid pushing Wellington buyers. ■ Reduce limits Id. London, anticipates skins will decline." The telegram was unsigned, but the flaintiff believed that it had been, sent by 'ay and Co., and he acted upon that belief. By reason of the receipt of this telegram and the instructions it contained, plaintiff had been unable to purchase any skins, the whole of the skins, in fact, having been purchased by a representative of the ■ defendants., The telegram . had not been sent by Fay and Co., but ■by- defendants, or by Georgo Davidson; d member of the defendant firm, and, sent with the intention that plaintiff should believe that it had been 6ent to him by Fay- and Co. The sending of the telegram was fraudulent on the part of .the defendants. 'Plain- , tiff had suffered 410 damage, and that amount he sought to recover. . ~ Defendant's Explanation. George P. H. Davidson, a member of the' detendaat firm, admitte4 in evidence .that he had sent the telegram, but added that he had no intention of Injuring anyone, and had merely done it as a practical joke. Plaintiff and hie partner had pre-, pkyed'jokes'on him, Btjch as putting lettered tickets on their hate and hanging stencilled placards' about their .premises. Tho case was adjourned. till November 23. . DISPUTE BETWEEN MAOBIS; Questions of allowances were in dispute in an action of Winara Parata against John Ropata. The claim was for 478 4s. for the hire of three horses and a dray. '•■-.- Mr. M.'F. Luckie represented the plaintiff, and Mr. H. E. Evana appeared for the defendant. His Worship did not make the allowance which defendant sought, but reduced the account by .£33 Is. Judgment, therefore, was for plaintiff for .£45 3s. ■ .' UNDEFENDED'CASES.. , In the following cases judgment was en* tered for the plaintiffs, by'default.:— ■ . R. J. Roulston v. Alfred W. Silvester, 410, and costs 41 is. 6d.; Charles Hill and Sons v. J. E. Scott, .£3.155., and costs 125.; Dayton- Money-weight Scale Co., Ltd., v. J. W.-Coe, 45 Gs. Id., and £1 ss, 6d.i J. Mulford v. William' Fellinghiun, £1 15s. 9d., and 55.; Amalgamated Society of Carpenters and Joiners, South' Wellington Branch, v. C. Melville, 12s. od., and 55.; the Commercial Agency, Ltd. (assignee), v. George Brooks, £1 Bs. Sd., and 10s.; State Guaranteed Advances' Office v. Caroline Wallace, 424 Bs. Sd., and 41 Gs.; Francis Kitto and Joseph Blythe Graham v. James Tullock, £5 10s,, and £1 3s: Gd.; E. Reynolds and Co., Ltd., v. Henry Wright, 454 16s. 6d., ond 41 lfls.; same v. Frank C. Chaybor, .£22 9s. Id., cud 41 35.; S. Danks and Son v. J.. Roulston. 414 2s. Id., and 41 11s. Cd.; Robert Starfin, Ltd., v. G. H. Fitzgerald, £i 19s, Bd., and lOj.j Ada Allen y. Alexander Reside, 43 35., and 10s.; King Goldmifiing Co,, Ltd!, v. Ralph Mackley, 43 155., and 125,; tTaemini Oil Company Proprietary, LM., v, Victor Lee, 10s. Bd., end 55.; and Mandel, Harris and-Carr v. Norrow and Co., Ltd., 430 10s. 3d., and 42 Us. JUDGMENT SUMMONSES. Thomas Taylor was ordered to pay the New Zealand Express Co., Ltd., 43 18s." by November 28; John Scarle to pay,Kirkcaldifi and Stains, Ltd., 41 lfe. by November 28; and Rawira Mohaka to pay Christopher Jansen 435 3s. lid. by November 28. A PROMISSORY NOTE. CLAIM BY A BANK. The National Bank of New Zealand claimed,, in reapect of a promissory note, tte sum of 418 12s. Gd. from .Tames H.ussell, grocer, _ Wellington. The promissory note had been given to' Uarke, Staples, and Co., merchants, Wellington, for goods sold by that firm to Russell. Clarke,-Staples, and Co. lodged the note (it tho National Bank for collection. Afterwards, before the date for payment arrived, Russoll paid the amount of tho note to Clarke, Shinies, and Co., and tho latter then undertook to withdraw* tho note from the bank. They applied to the bank, to re-deliv-sr tho noto to thorn accordingly, but tho bank okuuied .a lien qu it to tieoui'O tho HnWtitv of ClarJte, Staples, jcJm the noto Mα.

hired claimed the ' amount from Russell. Russell claimed that the payment made te Clarke, Staples, ajid.Co. discharged, his liability on the note, and he resisted further payment. ' . Mr, T..C. A. Hislop. who appeared for the plaintiff, contended that the bank, having ft lien, wns the holder for value, and was the holder for value, and was entitled to recover from Russell, despite the payment made to Clarke, Staples, ami Co. ■ •'■''■ For the defendant, Mr. T. Neate argned that As Clarke, Staples, and Co. had- only lodged the note.'for''collection'and'before Hie due date had countermanded the instructions re collection- and paid part of tlw proceeds received from Kusscll into the bank and made other lodgments exceeding the amount of the note, the* bank must be held to have appropriated the amounts so paid in towards satisfaction of the. note. His Worship reserved decision, ALLEGED. BREACH OF AWARD. t>, Carmody, Inspector of Awards, proceeded against A. J. Ibbetson, builder, Kilbiriiie, alleging that defendant had committed a breach of Clause 12 of the Carpenters' Award—whiehftravides that when a master carpenter employs a non-unionist he must, within 24 hours, notify the secretary of the union .in 'writing of that fact. • . ' Mr. H. H. Ostler appeared for tho Labour Department, ajid Mr. H. E. Evans for the- defendant. It was stated that defendant had in his employ a carpenter named Konzitt, who was tt non-unionist. Work being slack, he had agreed with Kenfcitt thait the latter should Eeek temporary employment elsewhere, and should receive from defendant a retaining fee Of ss. per \fcelc, Kenzitt returned to work for Jbbetson five weeks after this agreement had been arrived at. Th« defence was that the nature of the relations between Ibbetson and Keniitt amounted to an unbroken engagement. Elision, was reserved. A LAND AGENT'S CLAIM. ' Mt. W. Q. Eiddell delivered, judgment in the caso in which Charles Baker, land agent Wellington, eued Bernard Doherty and Emma Fanny Liobef for Bs. 9d., commission alleged to be due.on the sale of'part of section 206, Manners ■ Street, Weflington, to the People's Palace Picture Theatre Co., Ltd., for .33937' Ms., or, in the alternative,- .£62 10s., commission onthe sale of part of the section, to Francis. London for ' ,62500. . His Worship said that plaintiff must be regarded as having introduced defendant's property to the agent of a proposed com- ' pany, which was not in a position te tako ' possession upoti the date agreed on, but ) he doubted if it could be said that plain- '■ tiff ever obtoined the company to enter iato a binding, contract of purchase upon terms warranted by his authority. Judgment'was for the defendants, with costs. POLICE CASES. (Before Mr, W. G.. Eiddell, S.M.), THEFT FROM STEAMER CABIN, Terence M'Aleen was fined £2 for having broken a prohibition order, and was sentenced to <i>ne month's. imprisonment for having stolen a handbag from Amelia Bailey. .... . . •It was'stated that the accused had stolen the bag from a cabin on the steamer tjliniaroa. : • INSOBRIETY. Joan Maitland Harrop- ajid James Burns were each fined J2l for insobriety.