RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT TEMUKA.

Temuka Leader, Issue 927, 14 March 1882, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT TEMUKA.

Temxjka—Monpat, Maech 13,1882. .{Before S. H. Barker (Chairman), and J. Mendelson Esqrs , J.P,’s). crvn. oases. C. Storey v. W. W. Dundas— Claim £2 B»6d. Judgment by default for tfye amount .claimed with coats. X). Mackay y. A* Wilson —Claim £lB 14s. Mr Johnston for plaintiff and Mr White for defendant. D. Mackay : I was employed by d< fendant to drive a reaper and binder. I was to get' £3 and found. We had a look at the crop and he said he would allow me 10s a week more to keep myself. This arrangement was agreed upon. 1 went to work. Ife was bothering me and I gave him a week’s notice to leave. After ray week was up I told him 1 would stop at a day’s notice. 1 remained two days longer when 1 left. To Mr White : I did not promise to stay during the harvest. It was arranged that I could leave at a week’s notice. When he was finding fault I could not stay. I was unwell when I left hut that had nothing to do with my leaving. This concluded the plaintiff’s case. A Wilson : About the middle of January plaintiff came to me for a job. I said you are acquainted with the working of reapers 'and binders I said I wou ! d rather give him £3 10s per week than £3 and found, I found he knew nothing at all about tM machine and I took away the file and hammer from him as he did not know how to use them. When I came to stacking I engaged a party to draw in the corn. I found there was not near so much done as in the adjoing paddocks. I told Mackay it was not with him I found fault but with the carters. He left and I told him he would get his money at the end of harvest. He was engaged for the harvest and there was not a word spoken about a week’s notice. He asked me for no money until he left. To Mr Johnstone : I never gave him notice to leave. He had been stacking When he left I found no found no fault with him. There was a distinct agreement that he was to ftay until the harvest was over. Most certainly he agreed for the harvest. There would be no difference as to rate of wages if I had completed his agreement. To Mr Barker ; I did not tell him he bound b his agreement, when he

gave me notice. I did not advertise for e man to take hia place. Mr While urged ' that plaintiff had the not completed his contract and therefore was not entitled to his wages. Mr Johnstone replied to the effect that the cases quoted by Mr Whjte did not apply, and urged that the plaintiff was entitled to payment. Their Worships gave judgment for the plaintiff with costs, us the contract was not proved. J. Brown v. R, Williams—Claim £ll 5s 2d. Judgment by default for amount claimed and costs. ■Gumming and Hayes v. T. Hussey. Adjourned. ASSAULT. Willihm Bevington was charged on the information of his wife, Maria Bevington, with assault. There was no appearance of the defendant. Maria Bevington said that her husband, from whom she had a protection order, came to her house and asked to see the children. He made use of very foul language, struck her, and said that for two pins he would kill her and the chil. dren. She got her protection order in Rangiora. The Court adjourned the case for a fortnight in order to issue a warrant against the defendant. EMBEZZLEMENT. Frederick Wellsmau was charged with embezzling the sum of £3 3s, the money of his employer, Charles Storey. The prosecution was conducted by the police, and Mr Jameson appeared for the defence. The prisoner pleaded not guilty. George Jamieson : I am Secretary to the A. and P. Association, Ashburton. I know the accused- At the last show day, 9th December, 1881, the accused was there in charge of a horse called Rapid Roan, which took a second prize of £1 Is. and which I paid him by cheque drawn on the Union Bank of Australia. The cheque was paid on the 20th December, and charged to the account. The cheque was , made payable to Mr S f orey. Mr Jameson asked that the cheque be produced, or all the evidence should be struck out, Examination continued : I asked for the cheque, but the Bank would not give me it. I produce the bank book in which the cheque is charged. Otto Carsteins : I am a tobacconist and stationer, residing in Ashburton, and know the accused, I agreed with him to have the services of a horiie for £2. He rap an account with me for 11s 9d, and I gave him a cheque for £1 8s 3d. Mr Jameson objectecLio any evidence of written documents bding given if the document could not be produced. Examination continued: I produce the block of the .cheque. It is made out in favor of “ Fred.” I did not know his other name. It was for the service of the horse Rapid Roan. J produce receipt for the cheque. The cheque has been debited against p>y account in the bank. Charles Storey : I am stablekeeper residing in Temuka. I know the accused. He ha? been in my ernployment. I engaged him on the 27nd Sept., 1881, as groom for an entire horse in the Ashburton district. The horse is known by the name of Rapid Roan. He was to Le paid £2 per week and groomage ss, and find himself. I gave him no authority to receive money on my behalf. J told him tp do the best he could aqd travel as cheap as possible. I told him I would send him billheads and that fie was to make all the bills out and deliver them on his last round. He did not deliver them all, but be delivered the most of them, J settled j up with him on the 9th qf January last, j He gaye me two different accounts of his j workl produce the accounts. Mr Carsteins’ name is in one of them, I asked him if he had received any money, and he said he had not received a penny. This was on the 9th January last. I then paid him in full, and a few shillings oyer. The first information J received was from Mr Carsteins, whq wrote to me the letter produced. I told prisoner to tell Mr Cookson to get the prize money from the Ashburton Agricultural and Pastoral Association, He promised to deliver the message, and did pot tell me he had then received it. This concluded the case fop the prosecution: Charles Storey, examined by Mr Jam eson : I produce fhe document you require. The document I produce with a a credit of £3 10s represents the total amount of settling up. The who'e amount makes £23 16s 6d- He entered my service on the 27th September apd op the 9th of January I settled pp with him. Mr Jameson said that according to that the prisoner was entitled to, £3O 6s 4d on the 9th of January and he only received £27 6s 6d. It was remarkable that the difference between the amount the defendant received and what he ought to have received was the exact sum he was charged with embezzling. In further cross-examination witness said that although Wellaman was put in charge of ti e horse on the 27th September he was not to wages till the Ist October, and that his engagement was to have ended on Ist of January. The £3 10s deducted from his wage's was money received by him for a saddle he sold. Witness authorised prisoner to sell

a hoi <6 and saddle. Witness knew that Rapid Roan gained the prize at toe Ashburton A. and P Show. Mr J ameson then addressed the Court. As regarded the money received from Mr Carsteins, lie cited a case to show it was not embezzlement as ho did not receive the full amount owing, and pointed out that although Mr Storey swore he did not authorise prisoner to collect money, he authorised him to sell a hack and saddle. He wound up by saying that it was a peculiar anomaly that Mr Storey had in his possession belonging to prisoner a sum equal to that which prisoner was charged with embezzling. The Bench decided to commit the prisoner for trial at the next sitting of the Supreme Court.