MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 2205, 20 November 1920, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

The im-nlhly sitting of (he Magistraic’s Court was held before Mr J, L Stout, S.veslerdav. UNDEFENDED CIVIL.

.Judgment for plaintiffs was entered up in the following undefended civil cases; —Elsie Reeve v. Alfred Smith, claim £3 9s lid, costs 3ls (id; G. T. W’oodroofe v, 4, P. Young,, £8 15s 9d, costs 38s (id; Foxton Borough Council vv R. A. Burnett, £0 2s 3d, costs 30s (id; G. T. Woodroofe v. S. Read, £8 10s (id, costs £2 14s od, and G. T. Woodroufe v. Main Rnrukn, £5 10s 3d, costs 3 1 (id. JUDGMENT SUMMONSES.

In the case R. T. Belly a - , -lames Groom, judgment debtor was examined as to his earnings, after bearing which the Magistrate made an order for the payment of the amount. of the judgment, £4 14s Od, by instalments of ten shillings per week, in default sevgn days’ imprisonment.

William Robinson, who did not appear, and made no excuse for absence, was ordered to pay the Foxlou Borough Council the sum of £-1 2s 3d within seven days, in default seven days’ imprisonment.

TENEMENT CASE

Ellen Nash proceeded against 11. ParlUt to recover £3 10s 0d for rent, and also possession of house.

After hearing defendant's statement, the Magistrate adjourned the case until the December siding o! the Court. DISPUTE OVER CARTING CHARGES.

.Stanley Nowih (Mr Cooper) proceeded against T, 11. Crawley (Mr Bergin) for the sum of £3O lor carting 20 yards of metal from Shannon to the defendant s residence at Marotiri. The defendant paid £lB into Court.

The plaintiff staled (ha! he approached Mr Crawley about Hie i art mg, and be then said that Mr Petersen had the job, A tittle later on he received a message from Crawley, through plaintiffs failin', telling him to go on with the work. The metal was carted from about a mile 1 be other side cf Shannon, and plaintiff paid a shilling a yard royally on same.

To Mr Berlin; Some little lime before he saw Mr Crawley he t<>!il Mohekey, i'll 1 ’ of Crawley's men, Iha I he would earl ihe metal lor I r-s pei' yard, hid in price was mentioned by witness to Mr Crawley, When : u . (,'iive the priee of IHs lie intended eel line ihe meiai I'mm his in (hers place at. .Molds;!, whi.-h wa- only ah-aii! a mile and a-halt imm ( rawlev’s. hid when he urn the nisi ruelions |o (in with the wal'!;~ hl- : laiher had sold ins farm, and he

had I ’■< e.e 1 the mei a i Cvai the o'.liei side ol' Shannon. AI irdriy Mdiihips a yard he had earned ,C' per day with his iiiree-hoi'se team, and iarwas a fair n turn.

Mark Xevlh slated, Ihal defendant I old him to 1e 1! Id ; son to eari (he meiai. Xo menli'.n of- prme was made.

Harold 0,-limne considered hafi’3 ek I'd jif':- il:iy w;;a fair return for a : iin' :i three-In-rse lenm. 1 1 ii rI i ’cl i-r-’-ril -tat ■■ • i f li.H be bed jI; |(i 1 ‘ ;l !' i‘;l 5! L-;' 1 *1! (S l l Wpll Mr >. raw!cv t" supply I lie 111 ' ‘t; i!. IE- (’ ' 1 <'' ‘ v,- ;l s 27s (ill per yard delivered to ! litroadside. it being , wort li a f >; rt! k i )' 2- lid |.. can - ; !iui■ from Hhmv In l!,i‘ coiVshed, when 1 il v.‘; reipiii'<‘<iIfi 1 ini (MiiU'il «'•<•! * inji" lk‘ ix'-'liil Irma (than, ;iiul would have ra iied il i," Fox I, ■'in, uid Hum carted II mil to Marotiri. The order was <■:iM(• t■ 1!<‘<i by Mr (’!•;i wicy because wilmss (•mild not deliver 1 lie metal in tune. For the defence. Mr Berym on lied (Ik' defendant, F. M. Crawley, wlm si:iti'd Hint 111' first arranged with Mr iVim-scn l-> earl: 1 lie metal. Slmrtlv afterwards ho received ;i

message J.'nmi New!! l . through Mr - Mohekey, l!mt hi 1 wmn'd bo prepared In carl saiiu’ I’m' IS.-- per yard, and N'ewtii hiiii-mlf a fierwards approacliod witness mi I lie subject. Fat or mi, when witness found Ilia! I’oierscn cmiid imi deliver the tiiolah he sent a message In Newlh 1" go nn will) Hie parting;. Ho didn’t know Ihy 1 N’ewth was charging 30s per yard until he received his account after the work had been done. He subsequently saw Newtli, and told him lie would not pay 30s as JBs had been quoted, but was prepared in meet him in the matter, hut Xewlli still churned the 30s per yard. \V. H. Smith considered that 24s per yard would he a fair price for carting the metal, and would leave a good margin of profit. The Magistrate said that apparently plaint id's ]U'ice of ISs per yard was given on the ussumptimi that be would only have to earl the 'metal about two miles, whereas he afterwards hud to cart it much leather. It was rattier a pity Hud Newlh didn’t notify Crawley Hint lie could not do the :joh at 13s. The ’Magistrate said lie thought 2os would he a fair priee. and gave judgment for £25, less .CIS paid into Court, with costs £2 Os Od, witness expenses £1 16s Od, and solicitors fee £2 12s Od. BEACH DISPUTE.

Arthur Ernest Smith proceeded against Airs M. Vile to recover the sum ~f £27 1-D (id for wages in matehlining (he defendant 1 * house at tlie Deach. and i’or cost oi. shillijev a sand hank from iho front of .-■nnic, Defendant paid AH' into (.'■ou't. Evidence for the pliimtitC was to the effect that lie was employed to niaUddine the house on a dailv watte of Its. and deieudaiti also authorised him to employ a. man to shift the sand from in front of the dwelling to allow of a fence being creeled. He paid the man All odd for shifting the Defendant stated that all plaintiff was authorised- ur do was to shift sufneieut sand to allow of the post holes being' (lug, ami there was no ncces-

sity to slult it all, and he was not authorised to do so. She considered the £lO paid into Court was a fair payment for all the work done. After hearing the evidence the Magistrate gave judgment for £2O, including the £lO paid into Court, with costs £2 9s od. and solicitor’s fee £2 12s Od.