COURT HEWS

Opotiki News, Volume II, Issue 230, 6 September 1939, Page 2

COURT HEWS

LIQUOR SUPPLIED .TO NATIVES TRAFFIC OFFENCE^ 1 The monthly sitting. of; tlie- Magistrate’s Court was held yesterday before Mr. Lu.vton. S.M., at the Opotiki Courthouse. 'l'aylor Tar (Mr. BunkaU) faced a charge of breaking a prohibition order on 26th. August. Mr. Bunkall saiui that defendant was a • partially disabled returned soldier and had been 'Celebrating a football victory. -Defendant, who had many previous convictions for the same offence was convicted and fined £2 with 10s costs.. ■ Charged with "supplying liquor ten natives on 17th July. Hilton Grosswell. who frankly admitted, the- offence was convicted! and fined £3 and ordered to pay 10s costs. Arising out of the previous charge., a charge of taking liquor into a Maori tangi was brought - against J. Bum. .Defendant pleaded guilty and was. convicted and: fined £l, with costs 10s,, mileage 14s, and translation fee ss.

Frank li. Galvin of Auckland (Mr. Hodgson) was charged with net keeping as close as possible to the Jolt of the roadway On 27th .May. Sergeant JLsbister said that he went to Kutarcre where a collision had occurred. Both vehicles had been shifted!, but collision marks were plainly discernabler Tlie bridge' was about 12 _feet wide. The driver of-the other car had previously been prosecuted. Mr. Hodgson contended that Galvin was nearer the bridge than tlie ether driver. Defendant’s statement was read and a pi an of the roacl was produced. The case was dismissed.

Inspector J'. H. ‘.Morel 1 proceeded against F. Boyack '(Mr* Hodgson), the charge being one of driving to the danger of tlio public. A plea .of not. guilty was entered. The inspector stated that he was riding along St. John .street on a bicycle when lie saw defendant coming off the footpath on a culvert in front of Mrs. Rawsou’s gate. He could see tlie marks qn thefootpath where defendant. had driven, along. The distance driven was about 20 yards near "a high hedge. Thq magistrate said that it was quite possible that an offence had -been comitted, but the case would have to bo dismissed as it was brought- forward under the Wrong act. K. F. Brown on a charge of driving a car with. no. tail-light- on 11th August_was convicted anal fined 10s and costs.

lno Birch who was charged- with riding a bicycle on Bth August, witiiout sufficient lighting was con vie* tea. and. lined £l and costs.

, Ren nett Bruce Jolly , charged with riding a bicycle on 9th August at a. 3-5 p.m. stated that he was unde- the impression that- it was 1 "not. necessayv to have a light- until half an hour aftc- sunset. Defendant was convicted and ordered, to pay costs.

CLAIM EUR WAGES A claim for overtime against M. OKidd, Ltd. was made by A. E. Wilcox. The Department of Labour conducted pioeecdings on behalf of Wilcox, while Mr. Hodgson acted on behalf of the defendant firm. „A small amendment t>. the original claim amounting to an additional 16s Sol was asked for by the Department. Mr. Goodacre, who represented >:h> Department stated that tlie claim was made as t-ha result of" previous court proceedings when the Department was successful in securing a penalty; The worker had been employed on a weekly basis and was entitled to £5 •per week from December, 1938 to February, 1939.; 'The hours set out, in the schedule were the basis of the claim... Thy maximum hours were 44, tiie annual holidays and overtime were set out in the schedule. In giving evidence, Wilc ox .'-stated that lie was employed by Kidd from. December 23rd! to February llt-h and was in full charge of the bowser station, cash, etc.. The total wages received was £26 18s 9d gross. The wages: book had been signed, two amounts being paid as rent for the quarters he occupied. When the engagement firsttook place there was no mention 'of rent. The first mention of rent was made after a visit of the inspector, Witness went oil to state that tlietotal amount deducted was £5 os. A record of the hours worked as kept

by plaintiff was -produced in,-court

j\fr. Hodgson asked for the op-port-? unity of examining the books produced.

,Plaintiff, claimed that the hours, worked by him were actually greater than those set out in the schedule. He was given authority, after Mr. J3raysbay had been in Opotiki, to charge an opening fee. Kmployment was at night time, and during holidays. Witness stated that he always took over from a member of the staff and t.hi.s included the reading of meters and checking up of cash. Plaintiff claimed that he ifelced the company for a. statement of hours but that he ceived one. Mr. Hodgson contended that, the hours of work were quite definite and if plaintiff chose to work outside those hours lie could charge an opening fee as remuneration. Plaintiff ‘stated that this arrangement was made on IGth January-. 1 He •denied charging one man 2s opening fee stating /that he was given 2s when lie gave a'party, of travellers cups of teai ■ ;J ■ • - ■’ - At this stage Mr. Hodgson crossexamined plaintiff concerning the records he had kept in notebooks; ; Mr; Hodlgson read a letter from the Department to Messrs. M. O. Kidd, Ltd., ',settihg forth hours which did not agree with those- set forth in the claim. Mr. Wilcox said that the Department made up the hours from particulars supplied by him. V Mr. Kidd, director of 31. O.’ Kidd,

Ltd., stated that in October the comer .section was purchased on whiefi Wilcox was living, 'the bowser station being opened! just . before Christmas. Wilcox complained, Hand witness said he might he able to find some sort of a job for him. Witness suggested\liat Wilcox stay on. the premises after the men had left and, lie ; wou!ckhe,,giy.en J,d„ per gallon for petrol sold. However, Mr. Brayshay' told him that the; only way was to pay £5 for a 4.4-hour week. As the result of a complaint by an opposition firm. Air. Brayshay paid a visit and said that-'Wilcox would have to be> paid! 2s 7cl per hour. Ajter that witness told Wilcox that his hours would have to be limited to 36 per week. There was a distinct understanding about opening fees as Wilcox was hot to.,]>.e employed after certain hours. When the Department officer paid a, visit plaintiff not dispute tliei hours. ‘ ' i Air. Hodgson stated that, an offer Jiad been- made to the Department without prejudice, for a certain, amount. Air. Lendarum ghve evidence concerning the hours, .worked by plaintiff and was questioned by Air. Goodacre concerning the method of payment of the rent. -u.. *

Th© magistrate said that the position was quite clear. He viewed with the greatest suspicion the hours given by ! plaintiff concerning the hours of work. Had the .'.matter game before him; without ' confessions" being filed the case would have failed. Judgment was given plaintiff for the amcmqjt of the- confession, £l6 los. 6d, Avithout costs. " >