Magistrate's Court, Foxton.

Manawatu Herald, 12 April 1894, Page 2

Magistrate's Court, Foxton.

(Before H. W. Brabant, E^jggM.) Thursday, 12th Af^ifi^ civil,, ■"■ ' ;; f^p^ T. Ennis y. H. Botrfijtaj M Fbis was a judgment sumhior»^| »|jM the debtor did not put in an aijfkpi || net. The order was made that ith^ f§\ btor pay the amount or go to M?k iov 8 days. " { ft^ A. T. Oawston v, F. SUfe 1 * No appearance of debtor. f j^pf adjourned, by consent of^Tr^Ray appearing for Mrs Cawstok,*** next Court day. rr A ir A. T. Cawston v. JYTjeJcfrirGlaim £26 5s 6d. Mr Bay said it had been arranged that defendant pay £3 at end of month and 80s a month afterwards. *&jijk&fib 4Kb effect was made. " « n w w G. Ooley v. Ware Uno -TahitiClaim £16 for a tip My "f TOr Ray appeared for plaintiff, ' Bera&iftmt acknowledged the debfc" anfl^saiA**© understood he Was only tfr^JPfcirit when he was able to do 69^ "*2Fii(ltment for plaintiff for amoutft, w cwti 80?, solicitor's fee 21s, Interpreter's fee, defendant to have a month to pay the amount in. Joe Tos v. Samuel .Fowler — Claim £6 8s lOd. No appeaxutte of defendant. Judgment for amount and costs 109. Joe Tos v. Robert Silcock — Claim £3 4s Bd. No appearance of defendant. Judgment for amount and costs 6s.

A. T. Cawston v. John Scott — Claim £B 15s 6d. Mr Ray appeared for plaintiff. No appearance of defendant. Judgment for amount and costs 6s. T. Ennis v. S. Webb— Claim £5 Bs. Plaintiff stated he had sent to Danedin for a tailor, undertaking to advance his passage, to be repaid in instalments. Telegram passed and defendant agreed to come ; had paid C Bsa for passage money and 3s for r ifeilegrams. Defendant remained fcfctee weeks and then left. He was pal<l7osa week. It was usual to • give a week's notice on either side. A lot of work had been left unfinished. By defendant— Did send a document claiming 28s ; sent you three telegrams ; it was not the custom to pay travelling expenses in the trade. By s.M.— I rely upon an agreement in making this charge; I have not got the telegrams; defendant left without any notice at all; it is the custom to give a week's notice ; lam employing one man on piece work ; tailors are paid daily wages ; I should have to give defendant a week's notice if I wanted him to leave ; I could not find: defendant earlier. S. Webb deposed— Had answered plam*.iiff'» telegram, "Pay my passage and I'll come." He replied. "Yes," and I came; found I could not please plaintiff anyhow ; did not work on the 9th November ; had 12s stopped on that account ; told him that it did not suit him ; it is not a custom to * give a day man notice, or to receive it ; when I left here went to Wellington ; when I- left went to plaintiff's shop on Sunday morning for my things ; plaintiff's wife and Bon were there. By plaintiff— Averaged more than £3 a w6*k in Dunedin. Defendant asked plaintiff did he ever , give any of his men a week's notice ? and plaintiff admitted that he had given no notice to any of them. The S.M. said the case was a claim for cash lent and £3 10a in lieu of one week's notice. The cash lent now appeared to have been for passage paid. The plaintiff ijad said he relied on agreement made for payment of passage money. No telegrams were produced and there was only the oath of either party; He held the claim for passage money had not been proved, nor had the claim for a week's notice. Mr Ennis had stated that defendant was a daily man and he could therefore have no claim against him unless there was some agreement which was not produced. The judgment would be for the defendant. Defendant ask?d for his costs, 5s ooach (are j 7s 8d railway fare, and 3 days absence from home. The S.M.— Under the new Aot the Court bad power to allow actual expenses and he thought this was a case in whioh it might be. The case had been allowed to stand over too long. The defendant would be allowed his passage money, 12s Bd. [Left sitting.]