MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 14 November 1929, Page 6

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 14

(Before W. Meldrum, Esq., S.M.)

DEBT CASES. W. Jeffries and Co. (Mr Elcock) v. W. L. Joyce, claim £l7 19s. Judgmen.t for plaintiff’ with costs £3 Bs. Commissioner of Taxes v. Pine Limited Co., claim £76 ss. Judgment for plaintiff with costs £1 10s. CLAIM FOB POSSESSION. Westland Hospital Board (Air Murdoch) v. John Freitas, suit for possession of reserve. Order made for possession before November 26th. POLICE CASES. Defence Officer v. A. F. Dowling, claim for return of uniform, mvlue £2 Os sd. Convicted and fined 5s and ordered to pay £2 Os 5d and costs 10s.

Police v. Jas. Kelly, a charge of allowing 4 head of cattle to wander, South Hokitika. Fined 5s and costs 10s.

Police v. P. Souter, a charge of procuring liquor while prohibited. Fined 40s and costs 10s.

Police charged six residents with being found on licensed, premise’ (Pioneer Hotel) during prohibited hours. "No appearance. Three were ordered to pay costs 10s, two were convicted and fined £1 and costs 10s, and one was fiped £2 and costs. 10s.

BOROUGH BYE-LAWS. Borough Inspector (Mr Park) v. A. Griffin, a charge of riding a motor cycle on the wrong side of the road. There was a conflict between Inspector and defendant, the former stating the rider came out of Re veil Street, while defendant stated lie started 15 feet down Hamilton Street. Charge dismissed. Same v. C. Preston, a charge of failure to keep to the left when driving a motor car. Fined 5s and costs 10s, solicitor 21s.

Same v. P. F. O’Brien, a charge of riding a cycld on a footpath. Fined 5s and costs 10s, solicitor 21s.

BREACH OF AWARD

Inspector of Awards v. J. J. McIntosh (Mr McCarthy) a. charge of breach of the Hotel Employees’ Award. F. J. Davies, Factory Inspector of Awards gave evidence that lie made an inspection at the Red Lion Hotel and examined the time and wages „ook. He found that Elsie Deakin, a pantrymaid had been paid -25 s per week, the award rate being 325, she being employed since February. Found A. Case had been employed at 32s for two weeks, hut no entry had been made. The man, Wallace, did light porter’s work at £1 per week, but there was no record kept. G. McCabe did work about the hotel, primarily repairs and relieved in the bar, getting £2 per week, hut there was no record. When interviewed as tlie result of instructions from Wellington, Mrs Mclntosh was quite frank and gave all information freelv.

For the defence Phyllis Deakin gave evidence that she was an employee. When her sister Elsie came to Hokitika to .visit her it was agreed that she should work at 255. The matter was discussed with Mr Sneddon (a former inspector) and he said it would be all right and he would arrange it. Later her sister was promoted to assistant waitress and was then paid full wages. This was'after the visit of the Inspector. J. J. Mclntosh, licensee of the Red Lion Hotel, gave evidence endorsing the evidence of Miss Deakin. In regard to AleCalie he had been living for about 25 years at the hotel, when he was working at his trade. Of late he had refused to take wages. He had no particular hours. The place was his home. He was an okl friend of the family and received no fixed payment, in. regard to Wallace he was 76 years of age and had made the hotel his home since the war. He was not on wages and his status had not been questioned before. He had not received an under rate Derm it for Aliss Deakin.

John -Wallace gave evidence he was 76 years of age. He had been living with Mr AlcTntosh since the war. The Reel Lion Hotel was his home. He was not tied down to any hours or fixed wages. He did what he liked. George McCabe gave evidence that he was formerly a miner and was 66 years of age. Had been staying at the Red Lion Hotel on and off for about 20 years. During the last few years was not tied down to any hours. Took a holiday off whenever he liked. Did not do any definite work. Made the place Iris home and lie pottered about to keep himslf occupied. He worked about the hotel and relieved in the bar occassion ally.

Mr McCarthy held only a technical breach could he held to have been made. Mr Davis referred to the evidence claiming Miss Deakin had been paid an under rate; the charge in Miss A. Case’s was admitted. Tn regard to Wallace and McCabe they embrace hotel work. Hi ere was no question that Mr Mclntosh did not treat his staff well. He submitted the two men were workers under the award. His Worship said it was clear that a technical breach of the award had been made. Tn the case of the two 1 men it was beyond doubt that they were making a home there and that they were paid a small wane. The • same refers to Miss Deakin. It was a reasonable arrangement but they ought to have applied for an under rate permit. It was a purely technical offence. A conviction would be recorded and an order made, for payment of costs 10s.