Old Age Pension Case.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XLVI, Issue 101, 3 May 1904, Page 2

Old Age Pension Case.

}a the Magistrate's Court un Monday Mr T. Hutchison. S.JI.. delivered Judgment in the case in whicli the Deputy Registrar of Old Age Pensions proceeded iigninsi Joseph Martin, un old uge pensioner, on the grounds that lie had overdrawn his pension' by Incorrectly stating the amount of his wile's property. I lis Worship reviewed the evidence which stated that the defendant established his claim and was granted a full pension of £lB per annum in 1899. This was renewed in 11900. In 1901 the amendment of the Old Age Pensions Act cmne into force, by which the wife's property had to he taken into consideration and set oil against uny application by a husband for. a pension. The defendant had returned his wife's properly as nil, and stated that he himself wuS without property or income. In 1902 he represented his wile's property as being £l4O, whereas in the books of the Valuation Department It was | assessed at £290. The DeputyRegistrar's attention was directed to this In August l!)U;i, when he was I instructed to take these iigures in- I to consideration when next the pen-' sioner's claim camo before the Court, j In tlie meantime on August Ist, the pension had been renewed, though the papers had not reached the Registrar. On October Utith last the Deputy-Registrar was asked to report why the Government valuation had not been followed, and payment of the pension was withheld. It was quite plain that there had been no intentional misstatement on the part of the defendant or defendant's wife. The Magistrate, in granting the pension, had not taken the Department's figures into consideration, but had taken the word of the owner and leasee of the property noted. The case was entirely stripped of any unfair dealing on the part of the defendant. Mr Hutchen, counsel for defendant, had raised several points. The first was that the proceedings were late, and this being well-founded, there was no necessity to deal with the others. The Act provided that these proceedings must Uo taken within eix months of the facts coming to the notice of the Registrar and it was clear that the facts must have been known to him beforo August 5, 1903. Mb Hutchen applied for costs. His Worship said he could not grant costs against an official. Mr, Hutchen said that originally civil proceedings were instituted, but he had agreed to their being withdrawn on the distinct understanding that in the present action his costs should stand as in a civil action.

Mr Bunks, Deputy-Registrar, repudiated any such agreement,

Mr Hutchon contended that it was grossly unfair that his client should have been charged and put to the expense of this action, and then to he refused his costs when his case was proved. There was the expense of employing counsel, and without being egotistical 'he might remark that without counsel the case would have gone against the defendant. Ills Worship : Mr Hutchen, I have the greaturst respect for the bar, but 1 will not allow you to say that justice Is only given because a member of the bar happens to be engaged in a case.

Mr Hutchen : No, I didn't say that, your Worship. The Magistrate : Well, you said something very much like It.

Mr Hutchen explained his meaning. Me intended to convey the impression that a layman could not have succeeded in establishing the point in the case on which the judgment turned.

His Worship : The layman has the Magistrate to protect him. Tho case is dismissed without costs.