MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2215, 1 April 1881, Page 3

MAGISTRATES' COURTS.

CHRISTCHURCH. Thursday, March 31

[Before B. Westenra and J. E. Parker, Esq?., J.P.’s.]

OIVIXi OA3HB. —Sclandera and Fletcher v Crabtree, £l4 5a sd, for poods delivered. Mr Izard for plaintiffs. Defendant first pleaded that ho was under age at the time the go-ds were delivered. It was shown that the notice of intention so to plead had not been served on plaintiffs within the time required by the Act. Defendant then denied having bought or received the goods, but on being handed certain receipts which bore hia name, ho would not swear that he had not signed them. Plaintiffs’ clerk deposed, moreover, that defendant had offered to pay the claim if it wore not brought into Court. Judgment was given for plaintiff for full amount with costs and solicitor’s fee. Sours v Cameron. This was an action to recover £8 10a for wages, said to be duo to plaintiff. Mr Stringer appeared for plaintiff, Mr Holmes for defendant. Edwd. Soars, a farm laborer, deposed to being hired with his wife, at £65 per annum and £lO harvest bonus, to defendant, u farmer at dunes, near Methven. While in that service plaintiff was overworked and underfed. On one occasion ho hud worked three nights and two days with only five hours’ sleep. One night, after being at work from 5 a.m to 6 p.m. without food, he wus ordered by defendant to goat 0 o'clock two miles with a dray for a load of coal. Plaintiff did not go, and the next morning he and his wife wore discharged on the spot. Ho was paid the wages ho had earned and part of the harvest bonus, but ho claimed further a month’s wages in lieu of notice, and the balance (of the bonus. Mrs Soars, wife of plaintiff, deposed to the late hour at which the order to fetch coal was given, and tho peremptory discharge which followed tho refusal, although she had bogged hard to be allowed to work tho month out. Duncan Cameron, tho defendant, admitted having given tho order as

1 stated by plaintiff, but did not consider it unreasonable. Plaintiff had taken all day to go a short journey for a horse rake. It defendant had sent a dray away next day four or five men would have been kept idle until its return, besides the journey for_ the coal was only a mile and a half, and might have boon done in a very short time. Plaintiff was insolent when accounting for his neglect, and defendant had to discharge him for the sake of example to others. J. McPherson and M. Welsh, two of the farm hands, deposed to the facts as stated by defendant. The Bench gave judgment for defendant, saying that in harvest time, and more especially, as in this case, when paid extra for it, form hands must expect to work much harder than at other times; and, at any rate, plaintiff might have got up early the next morning and brought the coal. Costs of Court were allowed. Jowott v Dury, £4 8i Od for commission on sale of an engine. Judgment for plaintiff with costs. Allen v Treadwell, £1 Os, According to plaintiff, who is a bailiff, defendant went to him and engaged him to take possession, or endeavor to take possession ortho premises belonging to Bradshaw and Ishorwood, over which defendant said he held a mortgage. Defendant admitted this was to bo only an attempt to “ bounce " the mortgagors, against whom he could not legally operate. Plaintiff sent one of his cleverest and strongest men, who went with Treadwell to the place named. The result was that the bailiff’s man was forcibly expelled, and Treadwell was “squared up to,” but he, saying that ho would not trouble anyone to assault him, pot away unhurt. Treadwell then tendered 8s for the assistance ho had received, to plaintiff, who, however, demanded a guinea more, as his own fee. This was refused, and the present action brought. Mr Parker, another bailiff, deposed to the charge being as customary. Defendant deposed that ho only got tho bailiff ’a man as a witness, for whoso services 8s waa ample payment. The Court thought this an unlikely story, and gave judgment for plaintiff for the amount claimed, with costs. Francis v White, claim £B, for goods supplied. Plaintiff is licensee of tho Bolleston Hotel; defendant i station hand, a Finlander. The goods supplied were chiefly wines and liquors, to be drank off the promises. Defendant had given plaintiff an order for the money on Mr Wm.White,which was dishonored. Ho refused to pay, now, at all. Defendant, who spoke very bad English, denied owing all tho money claimed. He could not road or write, and if he put his mark to an order for £8 ho must then have had some “drinks in his head.” Plaintiff called a man named Colson,who deposed to witnessing the order marked bydefendant,who was then sober. Plaintiff produced his books containing tho account, a copy of which ho swore had been sent to defendant. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs and solicitor’s foe. Thompson v Hoddinot, £S 6s. Mr Spaokmsn for plaintiff, Mi Joyce for defendant. This was a claim for price of jewellery supplied to, and repairs done for, defendant, who put in a sot off of £3 Is fid for tools and material supplied to plaintiff. Plaintiff stated that ho had at various times sold and repaired articles to defendant, who refused to pay for them. Defendant deposed that articles entrusted to plaintiff for repair had been damaged or lost. The evidence of the transactions between the parlies waa confined to their own statements, which as sworn to directly contradicted each other. It was shown, however, that plaintiff had spoilt the work as alleged, and judgment was given for defendant, with costs, tho tools named in the set off to be returned. Rule v Atkinson, £5 2s fid, for gasfitting. Mr Loughroy for plaintiff. The work was done at the order of defendant, given to a person named Rogers in the employment of plaintiff. The amount due was admitted. Defendant stated that his agreement was made with Bogers, to whom he owed the money. Bogers had since become insolvent. Defendant did not know Buie in tho transaction, and was afraid if the money was paid to him Bogers’ trustee might come on him for a second payment, Evidence was brought to prove that Bogers was the servant of Buie—his foreman—not doing business on his own account or interested in that of his employer. Defendant said he merely wanted to be directed whom to pay to save future trouble. The Bench thought there could be no doubt about that. Judgment for plaintiff, with costs and solicitor’s fee. B'ranois v Beattie, £1 7s, balance duo for stabling an entire horse; judgment for plaintiff with costs. Young v Morks, £6 2s fid, a claim for grazing cattle. Mr Spackman for plaintiff, Mr Holmes for defendant. A set-off had been filed for £2O, a part of a sum of £4B 19s fid due for interest on certain moneys, secured by mortgage to defendants. Tho counter claim had been reduced to bring it within the jurisdiction of the Justices. On plaintiff being put into tho box, counsel for defendant at once admitted the liability, and proceeded to cross-examine plaintiff, and elicited tho fact that though Marks owed plaintiff the amount of this claim, the latter owed Marks large sums on other transactions. He denied, however, that there wos anything to his debit in the particular matter quoted in the set-off. That property had been sold by tho mortgagee, and fetched more than covered the principal and interest of tho loan. In support of this were produced two telegrams from an auctioneer and a solicitor in Auckland, where the property was and had been sold. After this evidence Mr Spaokman claimed a verdict, offering to accept a restraint from execution until the other side had time to bring their counter claim to trial. Mr Holmes objected strongly to this. The property sold at Auckland was only part of a much larger lot, and it was still indebted to defendant a considerable sum. The Bench, after a long hearing, said that as only secondary evidence on each side had been given the cose would be adjourned for one week to allow of the matter to be bettor worked up. Case adjourned accordingly. Judgments went for plaintiffs by default in Avon Koad Board v Stonington ; Same v Warren, £1 10s; Same v Poagram ; Weston v Jones, £1 3s ; Qahagan v O’Malley, £4 17a 4d ; and Eitohie v Hardman, £2 12s 3d. Judgment was for plaintiff in Mulligan and 00. v Hill, £lB fis lid. Cooper v Wright was adjourned till April 7th. Friday, April 1, [Before E. Westenra and J. E. Parker, Esqs., J.P.’s.] L'RHNrsNNiisa. — James Button, for being drunk and using obscene language at Selwyn railway station, was fined 20 i and cab hire 2s fid, or in default fourteen days’ imprisonment with hard labor. Biohard Sydney Williams, a cripple, for being drunk, was dismissed with a caution. Larceny. —George Wood pleaded guilty to stealing a carpenter’s two-foot rule from the B'lop of Gi orge Mattison. Wood said he must have been very drunk to have done it. He wos sent to gaol for twenty-four hours. Vagrancy and Larceny.— Wm. Watson, a Swede, on remand from March 30th, was charged with endeavoring to obtain money by means of a valueless cheque from W. H. Porter, liconsoe of the Shades Hotel He was brought up under the provisions of the Vagrancy Act. The cheque had been tendered in payment for a drink. Mr Porter gave evidence, but his remarks were not heard at the reporters’ table. The prisoner, on being asked if ho could hear what was going on, said “No.” The examination of several witnesses then went on in the same inaudible manner. Tho prisoner made a statement in broken English, which was quite unintelligible. Ho was further charged with stealing a cheque book. At the recommendation of tho Bench, the latter charge was withdrawn. Tho prisoner was sentenced to six months’ imprisonment with hard labor. Reckless Biding. —Frank Mulholland was brought up on warrant charged with furiously riding a horse in Cashel street on March 28th. James Pearson deposed that at about five o’clock, as ho waa crossing at High and Cashel streets, ho heard a noise behind him, and, on turning round, ho was immediately knocked down by defendant’s horse. Charles Brown deposed to seeing the occurrence. He said defendant was riding very fast—thirteen or fourteen miles an hour. Witness did not hour defendant cooey. Rout. Wood corroborated tho evidence of tho previous witness in every respect. Sergeant Hughes stated that ho saw the affair through- ( out. Defendant was riding in a most furious manner. Defendant, being sworn, said that his horse bolted, and, at tho time of the accident, was scarcely under control. The pace he was going, however, could not have been faster than nine miles an hour. The occurrence was purely accidental. He called Mr Pearson, who having seen the occurrence, said ho thought it was a more accident. He did not hear defendant cooey. Witness could not say what pace the horse was going at. He waa no judge of a horse’s speed. Frank Vane, a cabman, who had been on the stand with his vehicle when the accident happened, gave similar evidence. Ho heard defendant cry out to the person who was knocked down.

The hone was going nine or ten miles an hour. It waa well known as a good trotter, and very hard in the mouth, ile did not think the Lo.-ae had bolted with defendant; it waa, however, pulling very hard. [This witness agreed with all the others that defendant after the accident pulled up very sharp, and jumping off the horse did all ho could to help Mr Pearson.] Two other witnesses spoke of the occurrence in a similar manner. The Bench said that there was a great deal too much of this furious and dangerous riding done in the town, and it must be put down. Persons so disregarding the safety of foot passengers were liable to a penalty of £SO. In the present case defendant would bo fined 20a and costs 2a.

Assaults. Jane Willis charged Elias Willis, her brother in-law, with boating her, and Elias Willis charged Jane Willis with assaulting him. Mr Joyce appeared for Jane and Mr Stringer for Elias. The cause of these actions was a struggle for the possession of a tree that had been felled, and which was claimed by both parties. The fracas took plaoo in St. Albans on Tuesday night last, and created a considerable disturbance in that neighborhood. After hearing evidence which occupied two hours, each of the parlies was fined 10s, and they were made to pay their own coats.

Civil Oases. —Cooper v Wright, £6 ss, was adjourned till Saturday.