Feilding R.M. Court

Feilding Star, Volume XI, Issue 63, 14 November 1889, Page 2

Feilding R.M. Court

Wednesday, Novembeb 13; j (Before Mr Brabant R^M.) ; :^ if W. Taylor v. Piora^Claim £Bj2s3od. No appearance. Adjourned tui next court day. . - I •• : --d d ■■ E. G., McDermott v. Margaret -John-! ston.-rClaim ;£5 15s lOd. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. No appearance of defendant. Judgment for plaintiff with costs and counsel's fee. *. . J. Pask v..J. B. Roots.— Claim £100 on ; . dishonored promissory: note* ;^Mr^Cooke" , for plaintift. ; ;iNo appearatice of defendant:Judgment for plaintiff with costs and counsel's fee. „'.. . . .;... „-'L -.^.dsd^rji. J. " H. Bennett y. M." Ueti— Claim; £9 'lss; Id. Mr. Cooke for plaintiff. Judgment for plaintift with «costs and; couriseljs fee; amount to be paid in two months: ;/" ;;W A^and^^R. Pringlety.: oP.;Himes^--i Claim £3 2s lid. Mr Cooke for plaintiff. Nonappearance of defendant. Judgment; { for' plaintiff witli.costs,, "M. Keen v. Rnera.-— Claim £3 15si Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. £I to:be paid>at once, ' and; the ■balance fori the foUowihg Tuesday. ..- JUDGMENT Dr Johnston v. J'. R. Davies.— -Claim £3 19s. Mr Cooke for plaintift. -No appearance of defendant. Case adjourned till next court day. t .; ;.' . „ .'' Cobbe and JJarragb v.' W. ; Watson. — Judgment summons for £13 19s 7d. Mr Sandilands for plaintiffs. No appearance of defendant. Adjourned to next court day: . t -..'...,. .„?„■:? -..'...' „.'. djdid Cobbe and Darragh v.-W: E. Chapman; — Judgment summons for £9 8s 7d. Mr Sandilands for plaintiffs. . No. appearance of defendant. To be. paid 'at- once or 14 days imprisonment. ;-' J. D. Valentine v. W. E. Chapinanl— Judgment summons for £4 4s. Mr San- 7 dilands for plaintiff. No appearance of defendant. To be paid at once or 4 days' imprisonment. ■ ■ ' .- T. R. Taylor v. S; Waitara.-^Claim £4 5s 9d. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. No appearance of defendant. Judgment for plaintiff and costs. Gill and Bloomfield . v. A. Cameron (continued from last coiirt day).— -Claim £20, damages for alleged breach of contract. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff and Mr Cooke for defendant. * ' John Gill, laborer, residing at Oroua -bridge, deposed to entering into a contract to cut flax for defendant (copy produced) at 4s 6d per, ton ; it was the lowest price on the river; cut 90 tons arid .ll tons odd respectively; stopped work as they coiildn't get flax out of thejswamp;.-after-wards went to cut on the- bard ground"; and was stopped by Mr Downie ; consequently could not keep the rniljjgoirfg; the claim now made was for . loss'-of time , through being stopped in his work. Cross-examined: When* he" received cheque did hot then object to its being. £s j less than he had claimed for ; toldßlobmhe was going to sue, and he was perfectly willing; always cut the fiax to;tbe satisi faction of Downie and Reid. j .. Re-examined: Did not take the cheque i in full settlement ; the teams never had , to, wait for the flax. • . . : • ; •; .." .:; John Reid, of Awahuri, deposed:. He [ was one of the managers of the ;Orqua Downs estate- and a partner; in the firm of Downie and Reid, flaxniillers j^rerhem* . bered when plaintiffs were working fot { Mr Cameroh, cutting flax which wastakerj to the mill by Cameron's men;. all Gil] * had to do was cut .and help load the '.Aot , in the drays ; a tally was kept at the mill by tbe engine driver, as ; between witness. Gill and Cameron (books produced); 107 tons 9cwt lqr 61bs was credited, to Cameron, who had the contract ; Camefpri asked witness to pay Gill 'for cutting 9£ 5 tons 3cwt 3qrs 201bs ; had paid on that at 4s 6d per ton less contra account deducted i by Cameron's instruction on the" 21st oi i August ; after that 11 tons scwt lqr 161bfi I was cut by Gill as tallied hy the .book; > this was also delivered by Cameroh'; Had . told Cameron how much flax had been > credited to Gill; was not sure as to the flax cut after the 17th August (statement • of account produced).; Gill stopped worki ing on 21st August ; letter from Angu* I Cameron read stating he had not broken ■ hi-s contract, and that the amount due tc ■ Gill would be paid on application ; the , entries to debit were given by a person i employed, by witness and Mr Downie. Cross-examined by Mr Cooke : The , amount of flax cut was got from other people ; could not say for himself personally.; Gill objected to. the deductions be- ; cause among tbem £5 was kept, off for non-fulfilment of contract with Cameron ; he did not obj ect to the costs of the stores ; Cameron told witness to. keep back the £5 ; wrote out • the agreement between Cameron and Gill (agreement produced) ; Gill had not completed his contract when he left; saw all the places where Gill was cutting ; Gill would not cut the flax; where he was told; witness objected ; the flax be was cutting was the oldest and heaviest; •the flax should have been cut straightforward; thought he"> stopped cutting because of the deduction of £5; : the mill was stopped working; had not settled up with Cameron; did not intend to charge Cameron for Gill's breach of contract. Re-examined : Gill was to cut until the 22nd October, 1889, and the £5 was to be kept back until then. Angus Cameron, defendant, deposed to objecting to pay as the contract was not carried out, and the plaintiffs gave no reason ; know nothing of the claim till he got a lawyer's letter ; the plaintiff's were to cut to the satisfaction of Downie and Reid, and witness did notj,know why they left off. Cross-examined: Gill told him he had; been stopped cutting on the hard ground ; all the time, the plaintiffs were cutting he had not fault to find himself. By the Bench: The objection was that they were going all over the ground and picking the best flax, so as'to get the best price. [The evidence of the witness at this juncture was somewhat vague, and he rather failed to make himself understood by either his counsel or the Bench.] Alex Downie, deposed to being a partner in the firm of Downie and Reid ; plaintiff left off work without giving any reason except that he was not going to be humbugged ; there was no objection made by plaintiff when the last cheque was paid that it was not enough ; couldn't say why plaintiff left off cutting. ■ . ' \ Cross-examined: Was not prepared to say that plaintiff did not object to being paid less the £5; plaintiff did say if he didn't get the £5 he would leave off work;complaints were made of the quality of the flax, after which plaintiff cut it as good as possible ; told plaintift he objected to bis cutting flax on the high ground. Both counsel having addressed the Bench His Worship summed up. He was satisfied that Bloomfield was perfectly entitled to be a party to the plaint, which had -been questioned by counsel for defendant. The main question, was as to the exact nature of the agreement between tHe parties, and there was a difficulty from the evidence in deciding which party broke, j the contract. After allowing certain contra claims, which had been admit!©', he found that plaintiff was entitled to £y 10s 9d, and gave judgment for that amount and costs:' -' '• V ■' ' iW. Whisker v. H. Johnston.— -Claim £1 3s 2d. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff 'and ; Mr Cooke for defendant. Aft^r. evidence was given on both sides', judgment -wa entered for;defendaht wi^