MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1672, 12 February 1913, Page 5

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

(Before Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M.) '■; PURSER IN TROUBLE. Emilio Menzies, a purser in tho employment of the Union Steam Ship Company, was charged at the Magistrate's .Court yesterday with having received the sum of £6 17s. Gd. from a passenger on ono of tho company's steamers, and having failed to account to the company for samo. ~., Chief-Detective Broberg stated that, as there were other charges pending, it wouldbe necessary to apply for a remand. ' Menzies was remanded ■ for trial at Dunedin. ' DRAPER AND EMPLOYEES.' " A'Sno of £1 was imposed on'Hayman Kahn, draper, for employing (during the period from; November 1 to December 30 last) apprentices or improvers in excess of the number •allowed l>y Clause 9 of the award.

Defendant 6tated in the course of tho proceedings that he did not understand the interpretation of the award. 1 -

"•"• -•' INSOBRIETY. '• . Norman Campbell was charged with obtaining liquor during tho currency of a prohibition order. It was stated that accused had a number of previous convictions, and his Worship sentenced hiiU; to two months' imprisonment. For insobriety, Henry Stanley was fined 10s., in default 48 hours* imprisonment. Two first offenders were convicted and discharged. CIVIL BUSINESS. : (Before : Dr.'A. M'Arthur, S.M.) POWER-HOUSE WORK. CLAIM ON THE CITY COUNCIL.' The Wellington City Council was proceeded against at tho Magistrate's Court yesterday by the Inspector of Awards on two alleged breaches of tho Wellington Tramways Employees' agreement. : Mr. J. O'Shea represented the ' City Council, and Mr. Blair appeared on behalf of the Inspector of Awards. In opening vhe case for the Labour Department, Mr. Blair remarked that tho two cases were brought' forward as test cases. Tho first case wa3 that the council had on September 25, 2G, 27, and 28 em-, ployed a firoman named Tomlinson at repairing furnaces at a rate!of Is. 3d. per hour, instead of Is. 4d. .The other case for which the inspector claimed as penalty was that the council had, during tho months of-November and December, failed to omploy a trimmer on a Sunday morning shift; The wholo point in ono case was whether the particular work was or was not repairing furnaces. It was a question of the, interpretation of ; the agreement. One phase of the work in tho tramway power-house consisted in removing fireblooks which had been melted in the furnaces. . Occasionally it required an hour or two to chop such a blook out, and this necessitated a partial drawing of the fire, so that workmen could get inside the furnace. Previously this class of work had been considered as part of the repair work, and additional money was paid for it. On numerous occasions firemen had, as part of their ordinary work, replaced burnt-out fireblocks It was claimed that the firemen who had to remove molten blocks should bo paid at tho samo rate as that given to repair men. The second case was based on subsection C of clause 5, which provided that there should b© ono trimmer on each day of 6couring and cleaning in the stokehold. Work in, the power-house was done in three shifts of eight hours each. Prom midnight on Saturday until 4 o'clock on Sunday morning ono fireman and one trimmer were left on duty, but from 8 a.m. to 1 p.m. one fireman, but no trimmer, worked. Tim man had to keep up sufficient.steam to generate the power for running tho trams, when they started at ■I p.m. He had to do all the trimming and firing necessary in ono shift, and that was what was objected to. Mr. J. O'Shea (for the City Council) replied that in the first claim tho work mentioned was merely tho replacement of part of the boiler, and was tho ordinary duty of a fireman. Continuing, Mr. O'Shea stated that repairs, as executed by the "handy" man, were paid for as "dirt" money, namely, Is. dd. nn hour. Tho caso bci'oro tho Court was merely a

"turn of the screw" which tho Tramways Union was putting on; it saw a point and was going to seize it. The provision that a trimmer should be allowed on the 8 to 4 and the 12 to i shifts wns not intended to apply to Sundays at all, but only to week days. Ho contended that it would bo an absolute waslo to havo a trimmer engaged ,on Sundays. Tho corporation power-house wns a model, and -tho men aro treated very fairly. In the matter of firing, for instance, the coal was automatically trimmed. Jt was stacked up against on incline, and the opening of a trapdoor released it. It was thou autotoaUsftlly conveyed to tho furnaces,

Expert evidence was called on both sides, and after hearing argument his Worship reserved decision.

THE CIBCUS BAND PLAYER, ■ (Before Mr. W. G. Kiddell, S.M.) A claim for .£lO 2s. for balance of wages was mado by Charles Henry Cabot, bandsman, from Ridgway and Coles, circus proprietors, who arc- at present at Woodville. . After hearing evidence his Worship gave judgment for the plaintiff for tho amount claimed, with costs £2 lCs. 6d. A counter-claim for tho sum of ,£5 7s was made. Defendants alleged that Cabot onco dressed up for duty, but did not work, and that ho left without giving notice. They therefore claimed damages, keep, boat faro, and a week's wages. TJio' counter-claim was dismissed. Mr. H. Macholl appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. P. H. Putman for defendants. . EESEB\fBD DECISIONS. Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M., gave reserved decision in the case Bolton v. Burrell Bros. Plaintiff had claimed from the defendants tho sum of £B 10s. for professional services rendered. Defendants (said the magistrate) wero attempting to raiso a loan on their property, of whioh they only held a leasehold. An intending mortgagee was willing to advanco the amount. required, thinking that the .security was freehold. On Binding that it was. a leasehold he.declined to advance tho money. Plaintiff meantime had performed professional services, for which ho now sued, but be did not perform these services at-the request of tho defendants. His Worship therefore gavo judgment for the defendants. Mr. M. H. Oram appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. Beere for tho defendants. Messrs. J. B. MacEwan and Co., dairy experts, Wellington, claimed from T. Hudson, Levin, the sum of .£5 35., alleged to have been overpaid in error by plaintiffs to defendants in respect of commission on tho sale of a milking machine. Mr. D. M. Findlay apneared for tho plaintiff, and Mr. J. E. Fitzgibbon for the defendant. His Worship, in giving judgment, said that tho defendant •had received two cpmmissions of equal sums, one to his own name and one to tho Levin Auctioneering Company. Both these commissions were in respect of the same transaction, and were calculated at 2$ per cent. Defendant asserted that they represented duo commission at 5 per cent. When applied to by the plaintiff for." tho return of one of the sums ho mado no reply. In his. Worship's opinion tho defendant, knew or ought to have known that .an error had .been made. Judgment would he for plaintiff.

' . ■' UNDEFENDED CASES. Judgment by default was given in the following undefended cases:—A. D. Kennedy and Co., Ltd., v. William J. White, £20 3s. 6d., costs £2 45.; State Guaranteed Advances Offico v. James Paterson Hewitt, .£l3 10s. Id.,' costs 18s. ;C. and A. Odlin Timber and Hardware Co., Ltd.; v. Edgar Hereford Ciarfdge, .£l7 7s. 3d., 'costs ..£1 10s. 6d.; E.. Bolton v. F. Flau, .£1 15s. 2d., costs 55.; John Murray v. C. Bailey, .£1 2s. 3d., costs 55.; J. B>. Clarkson and Co, Ltd., v. Harvie and Critchfield, JE3S 18s. Bd., costs £1 35.; "Dairywan and Farmers' Union Journal" Co., Ltd., v. Herbert White, .£l6 35., costs ss.