CIVIL BUSINESS.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1757, 23 May 1913, Page 9

CIVIL BUSINESS.

(Beforo Mr. W. G. Kiddell. S.M.) CHINESE BODY. , PUBLIC TRUSTEE'S CLAIM. It is not very often that Chinese be-' come involved in civil actions, but ono of these rare cases occurred at tho Magistrate's Court yesterday. Mr. W. G. Kiddell, S.M., was on the Bench, and several Chineso were among the witnesses.

'l%e parties were tho Public Trustee, administrator of the estate of Ah Chong, deceased, plaintiff, and Mark Maxton, commission agent, of Greytown North, defendant. Mr. E. P. Hay, appeared for the' Public Trustee,' and Mr. M. F. Luckio for defendant.

Tho story, as told in the Court, was that Ah Chong came out to New Zealand some years ago, and settled in tho Greytown district, where he started business. He was. successful in business, and about the end of 19X0 he retired, having made sufficient money to take him back to China, and live comfortably. .Before retiring, Ah Chong entered into negotiations with another Chinese for the sale of his business, but after matters had been settled he died, the date of death being January 24, 1911. According to the statement of defendant, Ah Chong Iliad expressed a desire to "his friends that his body should be sent to China, and it was decided by tho relatives that the body should bo sent home. Arrangments were Iherefore completed, and tho body was dispatched in charge of an uncle of deceased. Defendant, who had boen keeping the books of deceased and had attended to matters" of business for him, made the neccssary arrangements for the transfer of the body. Defendant (Jlaxton) also authorised certain payments in respect to the embalming of the body. Other expanses wore incurred in Sydney, where, owing to an accident, the body had to be again embalmed.

In tho statement of claim, the Public Trustee claimed .£IBB 17s. sd. from Mark Jlaxton, alleging that this sum belonged to the estate, and that he was bound to account for it to the Public Trustee. It was also contended that the expenses which Maxton had allowed wore excessive.

For the defendant Maxton, it was contended that he had not acted with impropriety in regard to money matters. When Ah Chong died, Jlaxton had communicated with the Public Trustee's agent in Carterton, but as he did not receivo immediate instructions ho 'was obliged to tako action. Tho case was adjourned for a week. RESERVED DECISION. '' Judgment was givisii by J[r. W. G. Bidden, S.JI., in the case Wellington Woollen Mills Industrial Union v. Wellington Woollen Manufacturing Company, tho plaintiffs claiming £a as a penalty >for a breach of the Petono Woollen Employees' Award. His Worship gave judgnwnt for the defendant, with costs ill Is. -Mr. D. M. Findiay : appeared for tho union and Mr. Blair lor defendants. THE LIENS ACT. Messrs. Briscoe and Co., Ltd., iron merchants, of Wellington, claimed under Part 111 of tho Wages Protection Contractors' Liens Act, 11)08, to recover from Les.[ie Montaguo Pearson, of Wellington, importer, and James Craig, of Alpha Street, Wellington, contractor, tho sum of ,£B3 for roofing the house on the land of L. M. Pearson with Jlarseilles terra cotta roofing tiles. The work was done and the tiles supplied for the faid James Craig, between November 1, 1912, and Jlarch G, 1913. The plaintiff claimed in the lien of, for the above sum, tho land of L. M. Pearson, at Belmont Road, Jbllings, containing 1 aero and 13.1 porches.

Mr. Blair appeared for Messrs. Briscoo and Co., Ltd., and Mr. Machcll for'L. M. Pearson, and Mr. Peacock appeared for James Craig.

Another case, taken, under the sam;: Section of tho Act was heard at tho samo time. The plaintiffs iu this action were M'Gregor and Jamieson, plumbors, of Riddiford Street, Wellington, and tho defendants wwo tho snmo as those in tho former action.

Plaintiffs claimed lo recover from Leslie M. Pearson, owner, and James Craig, builder, the sum of X 93, being the amount of the sub-contract entered into by plaintiff with tho defendant Craig in respect to erecting gas fittings and ocrtain drainlaying- works, which the plaintiffs had not finished owing to the failure of defendant to supply certain materials. Lien was claimed for tho above sum and costs on the land of tho defendant, L. M. Pearson, at Belmont Road, Jlellings.

Sir. i.ovvey appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr. Machcll for defendant, L..M. Pearson, and Mr. Peacock for James Craig. Counsel for defendant Craig did not oppose the claim. Decision was reserved after hearing argument.

CLAIM FOR DAMAGES. Edward John Kriowsley, draper, Lambton Qimv, proceeded ogninst the New Zealand lixpress Company on tho following grounds: That on February 21, Hurry Radford, a. driver in tlie employ of tho defendants (in the cour.sc of his work) did negligently perform his duties by injuring the plaintiff with a truck which lie was using. In consequence of tho injuries received, plaintiff was rendered unfit to attend lus businoss for two weeks,

nrnl had to obtain medical advice and treatment, Plaintiff also lost a substantial sum of money in liis business through being indisposed, and ho now claimed JS22 12s. damages. Sir. J. J. M'Grath appeared for tho plaintiff, and Mr. W. J. Sim for tho defendant.

Eis Worship found that there had been ncgligeno9 on tho part of tho defendant company's servant, and gavo judgment for plaintiff for .£ls, and costs. UNDEFENDED CASES. Judgment by default for plaintiff was given in the following undefended cases:— His Majesty the King v. Win. Brisbane, .£24 7s. 6d., costs .£2 lis.; eamc v, W. E. Hollier, .£33 ss. 3d., costs .£2 145.; same v. Arthur Jones, .£B2, costs JCI 3s. Gd.; P. Hayman and Co. v. Win. Henry Frankpitt, .£39 13s. 2d., costs £2 165.; J. Myers and Co. r. E. Atkinson, X 8 Is. Bd., costs ifil 3s. Od.; Bannatyno and Hunter v. A. E. Ekstedt, .£l9 Os. 2d., costs ,£1 10s. 6d.; Hoy Cable v. Martin Leslie Millett, £4, costs 10s.; Dayton Money-weight Scale Co., Ltd., v. H. Cooper, £5, costs .£1 os. Gil.; Commercial Agency, Ltd., v. Arthur Sullivan, J3l lfe. 4d., costs 55.; W. 0, Wilkinson v. John Maddox, JE3 12s. Gd., cost 9 135.; Esther M. Jarrow v. F. M. Ryan, £& 4s. Gd., costs 10s. BOOT WORKERS' AWARD. Judgment was delivered by Dr. M'Arthur, S.M., in the case in which the New Zealand Federated Trade Industrial Association of Workers claimed a ,£lO penalty against Robert Hannah and Co., boot manufacturers, for an alleged breach of the New Zealand Male Boot Operatives' Award.

Tho alleged breach was said to havo consisted in the action of the defendant company in dismissing Rowley Edge, a lasting operator, who was a unionist, and employing John Burford, a non-unionist, in his place without first communicating with the union, and well knowing that a number of competent unionists were unemployed. The union also claimed ilO peralty for defendants' employing a nonunionist (George Issit), well knowing that a number of competent unionists lrcro unemployed.

At the hearing Mr. P. J. O'Eegan appeared for the union, and Mr .A. Blair for tßb defendant company.

In tho course of his judgment his Worship referred to a case which was taken beforj the Arbitration Court. In that case, ho said, the Court ruled that it was not proved that there were union men out of work at the time by merely shewing that ,their names were on the employment book, and that the men who were said to have been out of work should have been called to give evidence in Court as to their ability and willingness to do the work. His Worship added that thero was nothing to show that tho defendant had not -chosen {he two men in question on their merits, and in good faith. The union, he thought, had failed to establish the allegation of breach of award, and the caso would bo dismissed.