RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT TE AROHA.

Te Aroha News, Volume VII, Issue 447, 19 February 1890, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT TE AROHA.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18th. (Before 11. W. Northcroft, Esq., E.AI.) Claim for wages : W. Brumby v. E. F. Roche ; claim £3 5s 9d for wages. Plaintiff stated lie agreed to do certain draining for defendant at per chain ; he telling witness in reply to his enquiry that there was no timber in it. After working for a time witness found thereAtas a good deal of timber, and consequently the work could not be done for the price agreed on. Went to see Air Roche about the matter, who said he could not help the timber being there, and after some conversation said if witness did not like to go on with the work lie could leave ilo Witness thereupon left the job ; but on presenting his bill defendant refused to pay unless he completed the work. To this witness replied lie bad taken the work by the chain and was not bound to finish it.

By Defendant : f was not employed by you at 4s 6-1 per chain to drain your ground. I did agree to drain for you at same price as Mr Cox paid. I did finish three drains for you. I did come and work for a couple of days at a time, and then absent myself for a time, as I was unwell. I got £4 on account from you. I left some of the draining till spring, on account of the ground being so wet; and I did the work in spring. I did take my tools away without finishing the woik. E. F. Roche (sworn) : Brumby came to me about March last, and asked me to show him the drains I wanted done, which I did. He said he would do the work ; asking me if I knew his terms. I replied yes, the same as Mr Cox pays you, 4s 6d per chain- He replied that is right. Sometime afterwards he commenced the work. He used to work a couple of days and then remain a fortnight at a time away. I paid him on May, 7th, L 4 on account. When completing No. 3 drain he complained of the drain falling in on account of the softness of the ground, and asked me to allow him to leave the rest of the work till spring, to which I consented. In September he rode up and told me lie was ready to go on with the work ; I advised him to wait a week cr two longer, till the ground had got drier. He did. not come again till November ; and then brought another man with him to complete the work. Next day when I went up to them, plaintiff had made No. 6 drain up to a piece of timber, and was cutting the drain round the timber. I told him the drain must be cut straight, as laid off, and the timber cut. He came to me afterwards and asked mo to inspect the timber in the drains. I refused, ami told him I would inspect the work when finished. Without saying any more to me, I was informed defendant had left the work. I asked him shortly after if he was going to give up the work, He said “ With your permission I will leave it.” I replied that is as you think fit. That ended the matter, and nothing further passed. He never put any ques - tion to me as to whether there was any timber in the drains or not. lam quite willing to pay him for the work when he completes it. He has left some of the drains urtouched.

By His Woiship : The drains were to be over 2ft. Gin deep, and about loin. to Ift. wide. He was to fill in the drains with titree for 4s Gd per chain. His Worship said he considered the man ought to be paid for all the work ho had completed properly. Defendant expressed his willingness to pay for that, but said plaintiff had never come to him to measure up what he had completed. At this stage the case was adjourned by the. Court for a fortnight, to admit of the work being measured up in the meantime. J. McVeagh v. A. Downes ; claim 10s Gd due for advice given in month of October. Mr McVeagh, solicitor, couducted his own case. Air VV. Meldrum for defendant. ' J. McVeagh, sworn : Am a solicitor now of Cambridge, formerly residing at Te Aroha. In October last defendant called upon me and asked my advice. An agreement had been made between Mr Owen Gayer and himself whereby Gayer agreed to purchase his buggy, pair of horses and harness for £SO ; to bo paid in instalments. In default of regular payment instalments paid to be forfeited, etc. (Agreement read and put in evidence.) Defendant stated Gayer was in arrears with his payments, and asked mo if under the agreement he could seize. The advice I gave him was : That the .agreement was practically a Bill of Sale, ttiat tie could seize under it providing it- was registered, but being unregistered it was void as against, creditors, in case of an execution, the]

Official Assignee, etc. ; but except as against such persons it was binding. He further informed me Gayer had sold the buggy to a Air Wallace who had it in his possession. I instructed defendant that he had a good action against Wallace for conversion. Mr.Downes at the same time told me part of the amount had been guaranteed by Air Wiseman, and asked me if l e could recover from Wiseman. I told him it wa3 his duty to do everything to protect tlie guarantor, Wiseman ; and if he neglected to do so Wiseman would be realised. Saw defendant in December about my account, from what he said I gathered he considere 1 I had misinstructed him ; and Airs Downes said the account should not be paid. Arthur Downes, sworn : In reply to Mr W. Meldrum, said he was an hotel keeper at Te Aroha, and the defendan t in this case. He went to plaintiff i. October lasi relative to a Bill of Sale he held over a buggy, harness, and horses. After this Gayer sold the buggy to Wallace. Plaintiff told me the best thing I could do was to go and buy the buggy back from Wallace. I partly acted on bis advice, and was put to some expense in getting out of it again after seeing another solicitor, whose advice proved light. The second solicitor told me to send out a letter of demand to Wallace to give me up my buggy ; this I did, and grit it back with solicitor’s costs paid. Plaintiff also informed me Wiseman’s guarantee had to be stamped, which I found out afterwards was not the case, He had a witness who could prove hearing plaintiff advise him as he stated ; but could not produce him that day. Plaintiff said it was absurd to suppose he gave such advice as had been stated ; if he did he should not. be entitled to his 10s GJ. It was not likely he would advise defen lant to buy back his own property. His Worship non-suited plaintiff, with costs IGs Gd. Eliza A. Reed v. John AlcSweeney ; claim L2 16s lOd, due for grazing. Mr W. Meldrum, solicitor for plaintiff; Mr McVeigh for defendant, Eliza Ann Reed (sworn) : Am widow of the late Geo. Reed, of W aiorongomai. In a previous case brought against defendant for the amount now claimed, I was nonsuited through not having proper authority from the Public Trustee to collect the money. Since then I have received further authority from the Public Trustee, and served a copy of iton defendant together with my demand. Letter put in evidence. 11. D. Johnson (sworn) : Proved the signature to the letter to be that of the Public Trustee. Air McVeagh objected to the letter being put in the evidence, as not empowering plaintiff to sue unless stamped. .His Worship overruled the objection. In his letter the Public Trustee stated lie was quite willing Airs Reed should receive any money owing by AlcSweeney, aud authorised her to receive same. John Burns (sworn) : Am the son of Mrs Reed, the plaintiff. Remember defendant bringing six head of cattle to my moth si’s place to graze on December 24th last, and they ran on the place up to the time it was sold. John AlcSweeney (sworn): Deniel that he ever put more than four head of cattle to graze on plaintiffs land, also stated that ho had ma le several payments on account, amounting to 28s altogether, but had not got or asked for receipts. He also contended that the cattle were not grazing on plaintiff’s land above half the time she claimed for. Judgment for L2 I3s 10d with costs L 3 Gs Gd. Interpleader Summons: In this case Win. Fielder claimed possession, as owner, of a house on skids, sold by the Bailiff of the R.AI. Court, under warrant of distress issued at the 'suit of Peter Ferguson v. G. R. Beeson. Wm. Fielder (sworn): Stated he purchased the house from Beeson, etc. Geo. Beeson (sworn): Stated he had the house on a section at Waiorongomai for about twelve months past. Had not paid any rent for the section. Removed the house on February 6th. Sent Fielder up a receipt, and received L 5 from him the same day by his boy. Knew if Ferguson was aware of the house being his, lie would pounce on it. Fielder had promised him some time previously that he would buy the house at any time it was removed 4 on to his section. The L 5 received for the house had been sent to the Official Assignee. Fielder was cousin to witness. By His Worship : The allotment was given to witness. Adam Alenzie (sworn) : Stated he was Baliff of the R. M. Court at Te Aroha. On Bth February, under warrant of distress, he seized the house in question, which he was informed belonged to Beeson. Saw Mrs Beeson who told him Mr Beeson was away at Waihi. Told her what he had done. On 12th Feb. W. Fielder served notice on him that the house was his ; whereupon he applied to the Clerk of the Court for an interpleader summons, His Worship said he considered the alleged sale was a bogus one, and Fielder had not satisfactorily established his title to the house. There could not be the slightest doubt that at the timejtne B. i iff seized the house it was Beeson’s and not Fielder’s, and he should make an order accordingly, with cost* LI 15s against Fielder. AlcDevitt v. Mnckie : In this ease defendant was convicted of making use o! abusive language towards plaintiff in a public place on January Sth ; fined £2 and costs £4 3s. (Owing to pressure | on our space a report of the evidence in this case is held over till next issue.) j