MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXV, Issue 4677, 21 March 1924, Page 2

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 19, 1924. < (Before Mr J. G. L. Hewitt, S.M.) Judgment for plaintiff by defauL was given in the following eases H. Hale v. F. McKee, 6s Bd, costs £1 4s ; D. W. Robson v. T. Rplleston £8 14s Id, costs £2 10s 6d ; J. L. Hanna v. A. L. W. Benner £3, costs £1 3s 6d; J. Berteisen v. H. Ngatara £1 15s-ltd. costs 13s; Farrar and Parkes v. G. Wilkinson £lO -is !id, costs £2 4s' Harnett and Blundell v. Pipi Rewiti £3 3s, costs £1 15s 6d ; Holes Bros. v. R. Gage £4 8s Bd, costs £1 13s 6d; Brocket and Shand v. R. Gage £l7 5s lid costs £3 4s; E. Edwards v. R. Gage £5 4s Id. costs £2 0s 6d ; Le Manquais Lamb v. T. H. Bond £6 13s 6d, costs £t 18s 6d ; Short Bros. v. W. Hill 17s 9d. costs 8s ; Josephine Gillard v. J. H. Vincent £6 10s, costs £1 Ils 6d; I Le Manquais Lamb v. R. and C. Foote, costs 18s; W. D. Nicholas, Ltd., v. B. Du-’ney £3, costs £1 3s 6d; W. D. Nicholas. Ltd., v. T. J. Bogue £3, costs £1 3s 6(1. JUDGMENT SUMMONSES.

Brocket and Shand v. R. W.. T. Stevenson. £l7 13s 2d ; ordered to pay forthwith, in default 17 days’ imprisonment. warrant to be suspended so long as debtor pays £4 on the 19th of each month. M. A. Pnvlak V. C. Burgess, £3 7s: ordered payment in full to be made within three weeks’, in default 5 days’ imprisonment. CLAIM FOR WAGES. '■'yril Burgess, Paeroa (Mr J. L Hanna), claimed from H. E. Jones. Wharcpoa (Mr C. N. O’Neill), the sium of £1 4s, being balance alleged to be due as wages. Defendant counterclaimed for a portion of wages amounting t<» lUs 6d paid to two men for .one day’s work, and £2 as damage < for breach of contract. The charges were taken together. The first claim arose out of a drainage contract. The defence slated that the work in the drain had not been satisfactorily completed, necessitating the engagement of two more me’i for a day to deepen the diain suffi ciently to give an adequate fall. Mary Ann Williams stated that slm was at the Auckland races in June la. I, and heard defendant tell plaintiff that he "would give him a cheque be r orc the race meeting was over.-

Henry E. Jones, Wharepoa, sharemilker. said that plaintiff had been engaged schooling a horse for him, after which defendant had given him a job cleaning drains. Plaintiff had been engaged on the understanding that if he helped in the cowshed in addition to the draining defendant would not charge him for board. Witness denied that plaintiff had asked for money at the Auckland i aces. The drain had not been deepened correctly by plaintiff, and it had'beon necessary to put two men on to give the correct fall to the drain.

Judgment was given, for plaintiff for 15s, with costs amounting to £l.

A LOOSELY-MADE CLAIM. H. R. McGarry (Mr J. L. Hanna) claimed from A. Cadman (Mr O’Neill) the sum of £4 19s sd, alleged to be due for board and lodging and a deposit paid on a mare purchased .by _< plaintiff from the wife of defendant. H. R. McGarry, farmer, Waikino, sahl that he was claiming £3 for’ a deposit paid defendant for a mare and the balance was for board and lodging and money loaned. No money had been received from defendant. To Mr O’Neill witness denied that the money advanced to defendant had anything to do with a timber-cutting contract that was hi existence between plaintiff and defendant at that time.

To Mr Hanna witness said that defendant was hard up and had asked for work in the bush, and witness-did not press him for a refund of the money,

Emily S. McGarry, wife of plaintiff, stated that defendant had gone to Waikiuo and asked for work as ne was hard up. Witness undertook to board him for 17s 6d per week so as to help him. No grazing fees had been paid for the mare up to the time that the purchase was made.

Mr O’Neil) moved for a non-suit on the grounds that the amounts claimed were not due.

Arthur Cadman, insurance agent, now of Auckland, denied that the money in dispute was a loan, and. churned that it was money due to him as his share of the timber getting. Witness stated that he was quite .solvent at the time, and was not. in immediate need of money.

Cross-examined by Mr Hanna, witness admitted that be bad received £5. but denied that he was "down and out" when he went to Waikino. Lucy Cadman, wife of defendant, said that the marc was her own proprety, and she had agreed to sell for £lO to plaintiff. Re .examined, plaintiff said the original claim had been £1 Is, but -:o that had been added board and lodging and difference in amounts of insurance premiums.

His Worship said that he was unable to arrive at the exact amount of the claim. There seemed no doubt that the £5 bad been given in anticipation of work to-be done. The claim war. too indefinite.

Judgment was given for plaintiff for £1 Is, with costs amounting to 16s.