Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

A Bush-falling Case.

At Feilding . lasjk Thursday M Brabant R,M.. heard, the 'following case : — " " Thomas Perm v. Alex Munro claim— £2o 2s 2d, for felling busl at the rate of .2 ls an acre. Mr Prior for the plaintiff, and M: Hankins for the defendant. The case excited a good deal o interest among bush men, and then were a great many in Court durinj the hearing. The principal pout ti be decided by the Court was as ti whether progress payments can bi demanded on a bush-felling contrac when there has been no stipulatior made on this matter previous to tb work being undertaken. Thoma Perm had taken a contract fron defendant to fell 100 acres of bush more or less, at 21s 6d per acre everything over 4in in diameter with the exception of ratas ove three feet and the totaras to be felled The defendant was to do the under scrubbing himself. After felling 1( acres 8 roods and 2 perches thi plaintiff asked for a draw, where upon the defendant said he , wonl< pay 75 per cent of the money due, conditionally on the plaintiff under taking on a signed agreement t< finish about 70 acres of bush ii October, but he would not make i progress payment otherwise. Th< plaintiff and the men he had em ployed then stopped working

; Previous, however, to this, the ■ defendant had complained that the s work had not been done according to specifications, and he made the ■ same statement in Court. H. Boggiss gave evidence con- , firmatory of this statement. His Worship said thatj considerI ing these bush-felling contracts jfejSL i generally taken by nien WitHdUt i capital; it would bd a hard thidg td s refuse them progress payment, and , if the defendant intended to do so he should have stipulated so in the contract. As, according to inde- , pendent evidence, the work had not i been carried on according to the specifications he would be obliged to . reduce the amount to be paid by 2s , 6d per acre. Judgment was given for the plaintiff accordingly with ; costs of Court, ■ witnesses' expenses, ■ and solicitor's fee. ; Mr Hankins gave notice of appeal. — Advocate.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MH18921025.2.13

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Manawatu Herald, 25 October 1892, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
364

A Bush-falling Case. Manawatu Herald, 25 October 1892, Page 2

A Bush-falling Case. Manawatu Herald, 25 October 1892, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert