SUPREME COURT

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 134, 23 February 1918, Page 3

SUPREME COURT

ASSESSMENT OF BOROUGH RATES

A TEST CASE

Tho question whether rates should be levied upon the valuation roll aa originally prepared or as corrected after appeal to tho Assessment Court, was involved in nil appeal heard by tho Chief Justice (Sir Robert Sourt) in the Supreme Court yesterday. The parties to tho action were Thomas B. Dwan, appellant, and the Lower Hntt Borough Council, ,respondent. In tho Magistrate's Court judgment was Riven in favour of the council for £24 17s. 5i1., being tho amount of rates due on Dwan's property in the Lower Hutt in 1917. On behalf of the appellant it w.ts urged that the Magistrate was wrong in holding that the valuation roll as it existed at the time Ihe rate booli was compiled and rates demanded was conclusive n ; s to the value of the appellant's land, that he should have held that rates could only be levied neon the value of the land accoi'din.y to tile valuation roll as amended. On the other hand, the respondent council submitted that the Legislature had made the rate boolc conclusive. After hearing legal argument on tho point, Ill's Honour reserved his decision. This action ia regarded as a test ease, upon the decision of which hinge several other like disputes. Mr. T. Young appeared for the appellant and Mr. E. P. Bunny for the respondent.

AN EMPLOYER'S RESPONSIBILITY

UNDER THE MILITARY SEEIVCE ACT. A case of considerable interest bearing on the Military Service A.ct, and presenting some peouliar features, was heard in the Supreme ,Oourt yesterday, be£oie the Chief Justice, Sir Robert Stout. 1!. Hannab and Co. appealed against a decision of Mr. M'Carthy, S.M., in the Lower Court, convicting them of having committed a breach of the Military Service Act by cmploying a man, to wit, Harry C. Seaifc, who belonged to tho First Division of tho Reserve, and was not enrolled therein. Mr. A. \V. Blair appeared for the appellant, and Mr. P. S. K. Macassey, of the Crown Law Office, for the Crown.

According to Mr. Blair, Senile oimstcd in the Ovcrßcas Forces before Hie measure of compulsion came into effect,, and on January 2,1916, he was discltai ped as m<xl ! - pally unfit. Hr was piven a discharge to this effect. After Iho' Military Sorvico Act became law Scaifc was employed by R. Hannah and Co. The company invariably pave preference to returned soldiers. Also, before men wero employed, it was a rule that the factory manager must satisfy himself that the applicant had complied with the military regulations. Similar instructions wevo also issued to the factory accountant, who exercispd a.double check. These precautions were taken in the case of the man ncaifc. Rcaife told his employers that- he was a returned soldier, and was regarded in the lieht of a hero. ITo produced the medical discharge (referred to earlier), and his employers thought that, even though the man wan a returned sbloiet, this va° nil that was necessary. Scaife, who was a very fluent and convincing speaker, told them that after his first discharge, in order to ensure his peltinc to the front, he reenlisted und"r an assumed name. Under his nom-de-plume ho went overseas, saw service, was returned home wounded, and subsequently discharged, he alleged. Then, fearing the consequences, he had destroyed this discharge in order to hide the fact, that he bad deceived the military authorities. Scaife actually did go away from New Zealand with the Main Tlody on one of the transports, but was invalided and returned to A T ew Zealand. The trouble Was that he went away as one of the crew of the transport, and not as a member of the Expeditionary Force. It was after this that he went to work for Hannail and Co. After being in tjicir employment for several months he "was arrested as a deserter, and even when arraigned before the Magistrate ho had still strenuously maintained that he was a returned soldier. Convicted of desertion, lie was imprisoned, and upon his release lie was sent to camp, and be had just been again discharged as medically unfit. His Honour: How many men classed as deserters are there in New Zealand? Mr. Macassey: There are about 3500 not yet located in Now Zealand, who must bo employed somewhero in New Zealand. Mr. Blair: Half the deserters gazetted aro employed as seamen. James Dunbar Grey, secrctarj of tlib Recruiting Board, was called by Mr. MacosEey to show that every man who was discharged from tlie Torccs prior to the promulgation of the proclamation under the Military Service Act had to enrol.

This prompted His Honour to remark that it would have been better for the conservation of time, trouble and expense if the Department had personally notified men 'in thf same position as Scaifc, who had enlisted only to be nicdically discharged. ,

Formal evidence was Riven by Malcolm Frnsei\ Government Statistician. For the defence, evidence alone the lines indicated was Riven by Robert Hannah and an employee of the company retained in the position of factory accountant. Both witnesses swore that they eonKidered at the time that if a man produced a medically unfit discharge he had "done his bit," or attempted to do it, and was not called nnon to regiMe^ In his address, Mr. Blair contended that the assertion of the Crown that on employer was bound to inquire from llio Government Statistician in a case of the nature of that at present before the Court was simply imposiug a dnt.v that thn statuto did not cast. It v.as admitted by the Crown that the appellants believed that thw man Scaife was not a reservist, and counsel urged that the apnellants lad reasonable grounds for that," belief. Ihe Legislature could not have assumed that the respondents were bound to havo inquired from the Government. Statistician, or it would have expressly stated -to. For the Crown Mr. Macnsse.v submitted that in this case it was the duty of the appellant to have notified.the Government Statistician of the facts of the case, and thus relieve himself of the onus cast upon mm.

w , as w an ll^er of time, commented His Honour, for the Government J-0 have had this man (Scaife) examined, sent into camn, examined again and disrharged. and then, after imprisoning him, again taking him into camp only to again examine and once more discharge him. II the man had been a shirker it would have boon different, but the facts clearly established that he had been eager to serve his country. No wonder the country was P'nug up a huge hill of expense In its administration of the Military Service Act. His Honour reserved his decision.

SUNDAY TRADING

THREE APPEALS AGAINST CONVICTION. Arising out of the big crop of convictions in the Magistrate's Court for breaches of the Sunday Trading Regulations, an important appeal was brought on in the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon, before the Chief Justice, Sir Robert Stout. There , /was a group of three appeal which, for the purpose of legal argument, were treated as one, and the offence for which they j were convicted was that on Sunday, No. j veraber 4 last, they did, within view of passers-by on the street, keen open a shop for the purpose of trading. Tlio three appellants (F. 0. It. Munro, .Tessie Davis, and Violet. Duff) are managers for th° three shops owned by Marble Bars, Ltd. Mr. A. \Y. Blair appeared for the appel- ! lants. and Mr. P. S. K. Macassey for the Crown. Mr. Blair pointed out that the Magist.ratc had found that these businesses were n necessity for persons -who rogn. hrlv for ideals. or for persons vi c iting '•Veiling'"! fop the dnv. He found, therefore, that. Iho might lawful!* ' r e rt D onen to supply those persons, and 'hevnfoj-n if. was submitted t-ial th" annulmight, keen oncn generally. p »nnsel argii"d that of the k'nri parried -""i by the appellants were a n"oessitv. Fivintr so .found »n resneet of one class of eus'om. it follows that ki 4 a necc?' ; t.y for all persons. His Honour: Tlie only thing you can prove before this Court is whether if. was a case of necessity; otherwise the must fail. Continuing. Mr. Blair pointed o«f. that if the Crown's interpretation of the law «'a«s accentor]. persons eominT into linirton and dpsirous of. say. 'iirht vrfreshpiqpf. -would be forced t-o patronise the llAtnle, Hif Honour remarked that that would he- thn ca«e, and added that there were "omo people «-lio, on principle, would not go into hotels. On h«hi]f of tho Crown Maonssev oonffinrind *hnt the appellant*. to osfah. lisli th*t it u*a«» a work of necessHv. »riiicf. lino nqfflbijflb the h'hops were opened onl*' for ♦hi® purpose, and not 'v«<h f.ho add'Monat of catering to pn.coa that wem pot n^e^^'inns. His Hono"'' reservd h'j; decision.