RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Issue 1240, 22 April 1870, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

m At the Resident Magistrate's Court on Tuesday, a number of civil cases ware heard. A man named M'Kinnon, sued Mr O'Hara for recovery of £51 18s lOd, compensation for wrongful dismissal, wages for unexpired term of an agreement, upon the strength of which plaintiff came over from Melbourne, and refund of passage mouey from Victoria. Mr Harvey represented the plaintiff, and Mr Macdonald the defendant. From the evidence adduced, it appeared that after plaintiff had worked for Mr O'Hara, as tanner, for some time, the engagement subsisting between them — for bix months, on piece workwas broken by mutual consent, and payment byweekly wages substituted. The second arrangement was also modified at a later period, when a reduction was made in plaintiff's wages. Subse- ! quently, plaintiff became suspicious touching the security of his wages, and mentioned to a third party that he would, or had, " knocked off," unless his money was guaranteed by some responsible person. He had then left work for the purpose of seeking employment elsewhere, and had been paid, according to his own admission, all that was due to him as actual wages.. He now contended, however, that although the original agreement was broken as regarded the mode of payment, it was still valid so far as it | related to duration of time, and alleged that he I had not left work of his own accord, but had been discharged by Mr O'Hara: Proof was given, however, that, plaintiff had ceased work against his master's wish. Mr Macdonald made this the point in his case, averring that in an action for compensation for wrongful dismissal, it was necessary for the plaintiff to prove that he had been ready and willing to perform his pait of the contract, which plaintiff had failed to do; ; With regard to the claim for payment of wages to the end of the term stipulated in the original agreement, he held that that arrangement had been set aside altogether by what took place subsequently, and also that all claim to refund passage money had also been foregone, and that, even admitting his statement to be the correct one, with regard to his discharge, he would only be entitled to recover one week's wages, in lieu of a week's notice. Mr Harvey contended that the alterations made in the arrangement between the parties during term of service, were simply modifications, and did not supersede the original agreement. His Worship was of opinion that plaintiff had agreed to supersede the original arrangement, and that he had left defendant's employment of his own accord. Judgment would therefore be for defendant, with costs, £4 12s. A case, Alex. Grant, v. James Hay, to recover possession of a certain tenement and section of land, was given for defendant, Mr Macdonald having pointed out that plaintiff had brought on his case under a section of the Resident' Magistrate's Act which did not apply. During the hearing, a document, purporting to he a lease, was read— drawn up by the parties themselves — which showed the folly of having such important instruments written out by inexperienced persons. It set forth, as far as could be made out, that, plaintiff leased the land in question for three years and three months, with . a purchasing clause. Defendant had paid down £15, and on payment of £35 more, was to have the section conveyed over to him, which he alleged he wa3, and had been, able and willing to do, but plaintiff could not, or would not, give him a title, but sought to eject him. Plaintiff admitted the signature at the foot of the -document to be his, but suspected it had been tarn, pered with, several stipulations which he sup- - posed it to contain, having apparently vanished, and left no trace behind. He also asserted that the £15 paid was for " two tons of potatoes," and had nothing to do with the land. It was hinted to him that his memory was probably. playing him false after the lapse of four years, which soft impeachment he admitted readily enough. He was advised in what dire«ti«n his remedy lay, and left the court evidently sorely mystified about the whole thing.. A young man, named Hamilton, was broughtup as a lunatic. He had been for some time employed by different Bottlers in the Hokanui district, and> according to one or two witnesses, had lately been rather singular in his behavior. A day or two before his arrest he was said to have been wandering about the bush in -an excited manner without his coat, and also to have visited a settler's house and alarmed the inmates—females—by Mb proceedings. The medical testimony, however, was entirely in his favor, and his own style of speech in the court betokened anything but a wandering or weak intellect. He accounted- for his strange demeanor at the visit' alluded to by saying that he had been several days without food, that he had simply called and asked for some, and that if the energy with, which he used Mb knife alarmed the women, they " must have been very easily frightened," __ He was discharged, and left the court complaining bitterly of the unnecessary harshness to which, ha had been, subjected.