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
Article image
Article image

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.—GISBORNE.

Turn Day. [ Before M. Price, Esq., R.M.] CIVFL QARHB. Govan v. McGvibe. Claim £25, for damages sustained through the defendant having left his employ without notice, and before completing his engagement with plaintiff. Mr Brassey appeared for plaintiff, and Mr McDougall for defendant. D. Gough, plasterer, deposed he was a contractor, and had received a letter from defendant (letter put in) staling that ho would come to Gisborne to work for the plaintiff Mr McDougall raised an objection to any evidence being taken to the telegram sent, unless it was produced As the telegram could not be produced in consequence of the original document having been sent to Wellington.

Mr McDougall said his client would agree to have the case proceed, and evidence taken. Mr Gough continued : I sent to H. B. McGuire. South Road, Wellington, a telegram, “All ready ; come as quick as you like. Wages, 15s per day. Six months work ; perhaps more.” Overtime is paid at the same rate. Defendant started on October 23rd, and worked until last Saturday night. On Sunday he said he was going. I paid the defendant once every fortnight. I have been a plasterer over 30 years, it is a custom on a contract to engage a plasterer until the contract is completed. Last Friday he asked me when eould he get away and 1 told him in a month or five week’s time. Defendant knew that the contract had to completed because it was the custom. Through his leaving it will now take me longer to complete the job. Twice £lO would not pay me. Mr McDougall cross-examined at considerable length. Mr Macconnichie deposed ; I have been a contractor for 28 years. This man’s leaving affects Mr. Gough and my-elf greatly ; and 1 can come on Mr Gough. H. McGuire deposed : I am the defendant in this action. I heard Bain's evidence. He said he had some conversations with me. I did not say that I was engaged from the time 1 started till the time I «as sent away. I said io him I did not think I would remain till the work was finished, I have been a plasterer for 15 years. I do not know of such a custom as previously stated by the last witness, stated by last witness. Unless there is a special written agreement a man can leave or be dismissed at an hour's notice, I have known of men being dismissed at an hour's notice. I recollect 1 had a telegram from Mr. Gough, but L tore it up I cannot recollect what was in it. The telegram I think was, “ I can give you about six months, for los. per day reply, or reply at once " There was nothing more. 1 understood that I had to pay my fare here and my fare back. He never said anything to me with regard to my staying with him for six months. If 1 do not work he will not lose £5 as he says, as there are a sufficient number there to carry the work on.

By Mr Brassey: Mr Gnugh does not require to work outside in my opinion. I have spoken to Bant that 1 wanted to go away The reason I have stayed with Mr Gough was to oblige him, If the men stayed till the work was finished, they would have their passage paid. One can leave at any time. R. Percival, sworn deposed: I am a plasterer. Have been so about 40 years. A master can dismiss his men at a moment's notice, and a man can leave his master also at moment's notice. By Mr Brassey: I have been fol lowing the plastering business for 20 years in New Zealand. I have been several things. The last year I have done two or three jobs at plastering. I have been an employer of labor. I have been discharged at an hour's notice myself, and it can be done. This was the defendant’s case. Both Counsels now addressed the Court at great length ; after which His Worship summed up. and gave a verdict far the plaintiff for £ll 15s.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PBS18830219.2.14

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1278, 19 February 1883, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
693

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.—GISBORNE. Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1278, 19 February 1883, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.—GISBORNE. Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1278, 19 February 1883, 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