RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Evening Star, Volume IX, Issue 2545, 14 April 1871, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Tins Day. (Before A. C. Strode, Esq., K.M.) Civil Casks. Tubman v. Louglman (Manager of the Otago Meat Preserving Works). A claim for L4B compensation for wrongful dismissal. There was another c tse, Manning v. f.oughnan, but they were agreed to be taken together, as the men svere partners in the contract. Mr for the plaintiff, Mr James Smith for the defendant. The plaintiff is a tin smith and in his evidence said he was at the time of making the agre ment with the manager living in Dunedin, and that a wedc afterwards ho moved to Green Island. His wa : ting for the job cost him LI 7, and the expences incurred in moving to Green Island Mere about LG. Ho started work on the 6th February, obcyel orders and made the tins required up to the time of dismissal on (he Ist April. On that day Mr Louglman called bis attention to four tins that had burst when tested, and asked the reason. He explained they might have been imperfect through a variety of circumstances either imperfect sweating, or not sufficient lap, or not having had spirits put upon them, or over pressure. His mate, Manning, coming in at the time, aßcr a few observations the defendant told Manning he must go, and as ho could not make “ fish of one and flesh of another,” he (plaintiff), must go too. He and his mate had made 9360 tins, and only heard of four having burst. Any p’umber who could use a soldering iron could do the work. In crossexamination, the plaintiff said the defendant warned him how necessary it was that the tins should be perfectly made, as in the course of cooking the tins might burst, and injury or death might ensue to some of the workmen He did not believe there was any such danger, as the manager usually stood behind ashicld. Whcuheleft thereweremany thousand tins on hand. In the cooking room a notice was posted that the fine for bursting of a tin was 2s Gd, for a top coming off, 6d ; and for a leak, 3d. Thomas Manning, mate of the plaintiff, said the only fault found with himself and mate, was that they made too much money through producing too many tins. Six tins of other men’s workmanship burst to one of his and his mate’s. Ten out of 93GQ tins would be nothing. Even 100 would be trifling in that number. It would be a man’s own fault if his life was endangered bjr the bursting of tins in the bath. The tops ■were not soldered by himself nor the plaintiff’, and bursting might occur thiough the imperfect ■workmanship of others. Mr Louglman on showing him the four tins, said he would stand it no longer. He (wi'uess) might consider himself discharged, he was making too much money, and, turning to Tubman, said what is already recorded. His expenses were about LlO on removing to Green Island. A shepherd in the employ of the Meat Preserving Company used to go round the

,soldering with a%nifo or bradawl, and if there was a hole he made it bigger, and required it to be soldered, which was always done. His attention was only called to one tin that had burst, but it was not the soldering but the body of the tin that was torn asunder. Mr Watson said the plaintiff was a good workman. John Rumadge could not say what the average of bu sting of tins should be, not having been employed on similar work before. Thomas Horner, an employe in the works, could not say what proportion of defective work should be considered reasonable. J. Coventry, tinsmith, had been connected with the trade since in - fancy, and started the Works at Kakanui. Five defective tins out of 9, .360 ought not to be mentioned. At Timaru GO or 70 burst of GOO in the hath. In the muriate of lime process a greater pressure was thrown more suddenly upon the tins than would have been the case by boding in water. If there was danger of bursting, it was the fault of the overseer himself through no cover being j provided. He had no practical experience in the muriate of lime process, but theoretically he knew it well. An ordinary tinsmith could do the work equally with the best, if he took sufficient tinm. He had seen the effects of the bursting of tins on the roof of the "Works at Christchurch, but was not present. For the defence, R. Longhnan, manager of the Company said on engaging th • plaintiff and his mate, he explained great care would be necessary to make the tins air and water tight to avoid danger through explosion. Ho was two months in the Christchurch works and four months at Melbourne, in the meat preserving company there. He was constantly speaking to the plaintiff about his defective workmanship. He spoke to Manning severely about his bad workmanship, in leaving flaws through which air could find access into the tin. A hole imperceptible except with a microscope, would tend to the meat going bad. He could not swear to the number of explosions of tins made by the plaintiff, but they could not be fewer than 20 or 30, but more tins were returned to them as defective than to any other workman. He did not remember exactly what he said on discharging Tubman, but his belief was that he said .they were “trying to make too much money” to do their work properly. He did not see a burst in two months at Christchurch, .when 200 aheep a-day were preserved. In the Melbourne works 7009 a-day were preserved. During the four months lie was there, fourteen bursts took place. If the temperature of the hath was allowed to rise above a cer. tain number of degrees, bursts would take place. In the works at Green Island, the temperature could not be raised too high, as they had not sufficient steam- Rust might cause a tin to burst, but if the tin were only slightly rusted, the spirit used would clean it. The tin at Green Island was stronger than that usually in use, and would resist 10 or 12 degrees more heat. Mr F. Wye, tinsmith, foreman of the company, said the work turned out by the -men was untra lesmanlike, and they had frequently been warned respecting the work. A. M*Lean, assistant meat preserver, was employed in examining the tins. The work turned out by Tubman and his mate was “pretty bad.” Some of their tins burst almost every day. He also found leaks in the sides and bottoms through which gravy was oozing. Within a week 101 tins through which gravy would have exuded if put in the pan were returned to them. The proportion of defective tins made by them was far greater than that of all the other men put together. His Worship said there was no doubt the plaintiffs scamped the work, although they had been specially warned. Judgment for the defendant. Boulton v. Tyson.— L 52 Is 4d for money lent and interest. Mr Stewart for the plaintiff. Judgment by default for the amount claimed with costs.