Feilding S.M. Court.

Feilding Star, Volume XVIII, Issue 246, 22 April 1897, Page 2

Feilding S.M. Court.

THIS DAY. (Before Mr A. Greenfield, S.M.) G. H. Saywell v B. A.Beattie ; claim, £1 4s. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed with costs 15s- ■ Feilding Borough v. R. Sheehy ; j claim, £1 18s 6d. Mr Cathro, for plain- , tiff, asked for judgment for costs only, : the amount having been paid, less costs. Judgment for costs, ss. Same v. R. Bowler, senr. ; claim, £3 6s Bd. Judgment for amount claimed with costs 10s. Same v. E. Hannett ; claim. £2 lls 4d. Judgment for amount claimed with coats 10s. Same v, Mrs Rachel Montgomery ; claim, £1 5s Bd. Judgment for amount claimed with costs. Jas. Ranson and Son v. C. Groom ; claim £13 15s 9d. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed ! with costs, £2 Is, and solicitor's fee 15s 6d. Jos. Darragh v. K. Mullius; claim, £2 17s 3d. Mr Sandilands for plaintiff. Judgment for amount claimed with costs 9s, and solicitor's fee ss. C. J. Hanson v. G. Haywood ; a judgment summons claim £5 17s 3d. Mr Hageitt for judgment creditor. Ad« .lourned for two months. Jas. Ranson and Son v. Herbert Balfour; a judgment summons claim £33 16s. Mr Sandilands for judgment creditor. No order made as it was not shown debtor was in a position to pay. E. Lyne v. Mrs M. Duncan ; claim £1 10s. Mr Haggitt for plaintiff and Mr Sandilands for defendant. This was a claim for wages at 7s a day for driving a pipe to secure water. The plaintiff deposed to being engaged on wages and to securing good water at a depth of 18 or 19 feet ; Jas. Fraser abo gave evidence for the plaintiff, deposing that he had examined the water afc Mrs Duncan's request and that he drew one bucketful, the water being clear and good. For the defence it was contended that the plaintiff was engaged by contract to sink at per foot ; the defendant deposed there was pleuty of water but it was not fit for use, being dirty ; it was understood the plaiutiff was to secure good water, but this had not been done. Chas. Hodges deposed to having examined the pipe in question and believed it was in a sandy vein, the water being sandy and unfit to drink ; it was expected of a man when he started similar work that he should get clear water ; the water was not good enough for drinking purposes. F. Kite deposed to examining the pipo and found the water was not clear, being sandy ; the water, also, had a bad smell and was not fit for use. His Worship held that a definite agreement had not been made that plaintiff was to procure clear water and judgment was given for plaintiff for i'l 9s 8d and costs 12s. The Court then adjourned.