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

JUDGMENT AGAINST THE COMPANY

The case of Alfred Sawyer v. the Caledonian Gold-mining Company, being a claim for £500 damages for injuries sustained by an accident in a ca?e in the Company's mine on the 26th of March last, occupied the attention of Mr Northcrofb, Warden, until 4.30 p.m. yesterday. Mr Button then addressed the Court on behalf of the defendant Company, his speech occupying an hour and a-half. Mr Cooper replied in an able and telling speech for the plaintiff, in the course of which he produced the mine manager's (Mr Jame&'s) diary, and contended that a number of bogus entries had been made. He pointed out that according to the Mining Acb, ISB6, it was necessary for the manager to inspect and examine the shaft at least once a. week, and make an entry ! of the fact in a diary to be kept for the purpose. He maintained that by the diary j produced wherever the words " Inspected the shaft, everything all safe " occurred, , there were signs that they had been inserted at a recent date, and subsequent to the day on which the remainder of the entry was made. In every case where these entries respecting the safe condition of the shaft were made, the^e words alone were impressed on the blotting paper between the pages, the other portion of the entry not leaving any impression whatever on the pad, while the ink was also a different colour. He contended that the plaintiff had proved that there had been a breach oE common law duty, inasmuch as the defendant had been guilty of not) only general but particular negligence ; that the Company were now effecting repairs and doing work in the shaft which should have been done before, thus admitting by their action thot they had previously beon guilty of negligence : and that the defence had failed to prove contributory negligence on the part of plaintiff. His Worship intimated that he intended to give judgment in favour of the plaintiff ; he would defer assessing the amount of damages, however, until 10.30 a.m. today(Friday).

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TAN18891016.2.22.1

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 411, 16 October 1889, Page 4

Word count
Tapeke kupu
346

JUDGMENT AGAINST THE COMPANY Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 411, 16 October 1889, Page 4

JUDGMENT AGAINST THE COMPANY Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 411, 16 October 1889, Page 4

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