Resident Magistrates Court, TE AROHA. TUESDAY, APRIL, 2nd, 1889.

Te Aroha News, Volume VI, Issue 356, 3 April 1889, Page 2

Resident Magistrates Court, TE AROHA. TUESDAY, APRIL, 2nd, 1889.

(Before 11. W. No itl. croft, Esq., li.M):> Pouoe v, S T. Smut-don. Defendant, proprietor of .the Waiorongoniai Hotel, Waiorongoimi, was charged with allowing billiards to be played ii\ his house after the hour for closing ; 10 p.uu, on the niuiit of Maroh BQth, at his hotel Waiorongoinai. Sergeant Emerson stated Constable Wild being on duty at Waiorongomai on the night in question, heaid billiards being played, and went anu spoke to defendant about it, requesting that it be stopped. Defendant >eplifd it was only hia boarders \\ ho were pi a* in if, and declined to stop it ; hence the issuing of the summons, as doL'eudant appeared to wish t<» establish a ri^ht and piecodunt ; which, if allowed, would result in other hoteikeepers making similar breaches of the Act, and then Baying it was only boardeis. Defendant , said Constable Wild never asked him to stop the piling, ;vnd did not

spom very clear as to tlio h\v himself on Jlie subject : they sim >lv argued tho point in a friendly way. The only pursons playing on the occasion referred to were hoarders, who bad been staying with bim for months previously, the hotel being closed to all others at the proper hour. In | allowing bin boarders to play be did not know ho wni brenkinsr the law, and expressed regret it! he hud done so. I Hit* Worship dismissed the oase with a oantion t arid advised defendant not to allow the offence to occur again. Ellen Maloney v. William Malnney. Defendant was charged wilh the deseriion of his wife and three children", at Wlmharoa, since December last, Defendant stated he had no intention of desevting his wifo and family, but left for Auckland for a time because he had been unwjill. He was quite'willing io return and do what he could for his fiimily, He was one of (he Matimiata Special Settlers. His Worship said he had written to Mr N, I. Hunt, present manager of Matamata estate, asking him for information, and Mr j Hunt informed him (the Warden), respecting tho terms under which defendant held his hind . lie was of opinion defendant might go on paying for it till doomsday and yet .not make it his own : at any rate he would certainly pay five or six times more than it is worth. It appeared to him (the Warden) a strange arrangement that defendant had cows, and 3 r et was bound to send iO\ his milk to the factory ; in fart was simply working for the factory Mr Hunt informed him be could not alter the e::i<ting agreement, but if defendant sun cndered hi* prosent title, he could then offer him the land on far better terms. Mr Hunt was anxious the settlers should have n fair chance to acquire the land. His Woiship said he i would adjourn the case for two months, in order to give defendant an opportunity to return hotne,and try and come to some fresh arrangement with respect to the land, meantime he must 6e,e and provide for his children. John O'Bkjan v Henry Hopper Adams :— Claim L 45 12s 6d wages, alleged to bo due , for woik done atKomata, being 140 days at 8s ; and 18s 6d paid on account of defendant ; less credits amounting to LI I 4s. Mr McGregor Hay, solicitor for plaintiff, and Mr J. A. Miller, solicitor for defendant. Mr Hay brielly stated theoase for his client. The first witness called wa<? JohnO'Brian, who, on being Swoin, in reply to Mr Hay gave evidence in suppoi tof his claim ; the time charged for, rate of wages, etc. By MrMillcr: I was away whilst working ut Komaia tlnee days in Auckland, this I have not eh wged for. lam sure I lost no other tioie ou my own account, but cume up to see Mr Adams sometimes on his business. Mr Adams lived at Waiorongomai, and had no check on my time. I was never on my own farm during the timo I have charged Mr Adams for. I was engaged at 8s por day. I worked wet and dry. I never went to Waikuto with any mures whilst in Mr Adams employ. MiAdams had given me the sack before I went to Waikato with any mares. I did lender Mr Adam 1 ? an account tho other day, Mr Adams asked me for my account. From tho time Mr Adams g-ivo me the £11, i nd £5 for a contract, I n-'ver asked him for any money until the other day. When I sent in my account to Mr Adams he said there was some mistake, that it was wrong. Mr Adams did give me a elioque for £20 for Mr Logan, which I gave Mr Logan. I received the cheque for £11 sometime after I was knocked of. No conversation took plaoo between me and Mr Adams about rate of wages after F had been working a few week 1 ?. After Mr Adams knocked me off lie said he could not give me B.s a day, but could only pay me 7s a duy. [ never made a new arrangement with Mr Adams towoikfor7s adny. I have not a bad memory, but sometimes I forget things. By Mr Hay : The contract for L 5 was quite independant of my wages. I would have had Mr f;Ogan here only that the time was too short to do so. Mr Adams wrote tome, stating Iliad made a mistake. In reply to Ills Worship : I called on Mr Adams after I received that letter and tohl him he had not paid me. This was tho case for Plaint'ff. Mr Miller : Plaintiff clearly know before he took out tho summon'; that Mr Adams claimed to have pud him L2O, etc. Mr Adams admits owing plaintiff a certain amount, but is prepared to prove that the cheques plaintiff states he handed to Loufan, were expressly piid to plaintiff on account of wages, and tilled out in his name. Plaintiff tlenj ing that he received these amounts, put it out of tho question frr defendant to try further to come to a settlement, and he preferred the ea«e coming into Court. Henry Hopper Adams ("sworn) said : I engaged with plaintiff to work for me on my faim at Komata at 8s a day. After woiking about six weeks I told plaintiff I could not afford to pay him 8s a day to work on my farm, but would pay him 7s a day, or £2 2s a week ; which reduced v ages plaintiff at first objected to, but afterwards agreed to accept. It was after I went away on a visit to America that Brian look some mares of mine over to Waikato,aqd it was without niy knowledge. After my return he told me lie had done so,and I paid him for the service of the horse. I paid plaintiff before Heft for America one cheque of £5, and another for £20. My wife wrote out the cheques for me, my arm being broken at the time, The money has been paid and charged to my bank account, Neither of these two cheques were given plaintiff for Mr Lo^an. In my bunk book two cheques which I paid Mr Logan are entered, one for £15, cashed on XGth Aug.; and one for £16, cashed on the 11th Sept. The cheque for £2U I gave plaintiff on the Sunday evening before I left for America j it was dated the previous day Sujpwday, Sept. 11th, a,nd was cashed at xm> Rank,Te Aroha the following day 13th iSept,, as will be seen on the fuce of the cheq-ie (here put in evidence). 1 claim to deduct £.25 already paid, and the Is a day in rate of wages. I suppose I must accept the number of days woikcd as being correct. By Mr flay : I ha^e not got my oheque butts, I burnt thenh all the day I left Waiorongomai. I JVi a lot of. cheque butts stored up forysome timo, and not thinking I should want them any longer put them in the s,to^e. I cannot say how much Mr Logans account for posts was. [ believe tho last ohequef ir J§J6 forL'^gan was given OBrien to give him, I will swear the last cheque for £16, referred to as ha\ ing beon paid to , OBrien, was "ot given him for Logan. 1 will swear the cheque for L2O, dated Uth September, was not given Q'Brian for Logan j a.lao, that it

was not taken into account when settling with Lo^an. I will also swear that these cheques were not in ary way applied to my use. My wife was present when these cheques were given. I did not take nny receipt from O'Brian for the money. The reason so much time haselapsed without my paying plaintiff tho balance 1 owe him is, that I asked him on several occasions to come to my house and settle up, and his reply t° mo w a s there was no huny as the money Wtu< i better in my hands than bis. I never asked O'Brian to sign the Company's pay sheet for going to the Thames, unless he went on the Company's business. Eliza Adutns (sworn) : Am the wife of the defendant in this ease, H. 11. Adams. I remomber O'Brian going to work for my husband at Komatn at 8s per day. lam aware an alteration was mndw afterwards. O'Biinn himself came and told me that he was going back to work at Kom.ita at 7s per day. Mv husband reduced tho rate of wages as being more than he could afford for farm work. I gave OBrien the two cheques (produced) one for L 5 and one for L2O. These two cheques were given OBrien for work he had done at Konmta, Neither of the cheques were given OBrien on account of Logan. If they had been intended for Logan his name, and not O'Biian's, would have been filled in. By Mr Hay : Both Mr Adams and O'Brian told me of the reduction in rate of wages. When I paid O'Brian at Mr Adams request, I did not ask for or receive any receipt. After the summons was issued by O'Brian, I sent for him, and he then denied all knowledge of receiving the cheques referred to as being paid him. By Mr Miller : At this interview since the Rummons was issued, O'Brian denied having ever leceived these cheques at all, one for L 5 and one for L2O; and said any person could write cheques and put names to them. These being all the witnesses called His Worship said the evidence was very- incomplete without that of Logan, who was a most important witnesH. Counsel for both plaintiff and defendant agreed with His Worship, and the case was accordingly adjourned till next Court day, in order that Logan might be meantime subpooned. Peler Oliphant v. James Gordon, Claim Ll9 12*, arrears of rent ; a'so that an order be mtde that possession of the house be given up. Adam Menzie appeared on behalf of plaintiff. Defendant stated he did not know Mr Oliphant in the matter. He was put in possession of the house by a Mr Cook, who told him to pay the rent only to himself. Plaintiff called the Mining Registrar who proved that the property in question was transferred to Peter Oliohant by Win. Cook, by deed bearing date 13ih February, 1883 ; and which deed was registered on May Bth following. Judgment for LI 9 12 J , und costs Lt Us ; and an order was made that possession of the house be given up by the 6th inst.