HARRIS V. GREATREX.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1135, 5 February 1884, Page 3

HARRIS V. GREATREX.

This case was tried at the Wellington Supreme Court the other day. The claim was for £SOO, for damages for all aged wrongful dismissal. The plaintiff bad been engaged in England to come and manage the New Zealand business of Chas. Greatrex and Son, saddlers, Wallsall, England. He commenced duty in March last, and was summarily dismissed at the end of March for alleged misconduct, bordering on insanity. The question for the special jury was whether the plaintiff’s behaviour was so eccentric and ridiculous as to justify instant dismissal. The jury found for the plaintiff, assessing damages at £350 with costs. Mr Travers, who appeared for the defendants, crossexamined plaintiff as follows : Mr Travers : Did you walk about in an unusual costume in front of the Government Buildings, dressed in a light coat, carpet slippers, carrying a gun at full cock in one hand and an umbrella in the other I—Plaintiff: I can show you the dustcoat I had on, and the umbrella. The gun was at full cock, but it was not loaded. I had the square all to myself that time.

If there were empty cartridges in the gun, how were people to know they were empty without drawing them ? There was another way of finding out. What was it ?—By striking the hammer on the nipple.—(Laughter.) You had a hat that became celebrated, I believe I—l had a hat.

And it was found on a poll, which wasn’t your poll, 1 believe ? That hat was stolen at Blenheim, and, with the assistance of a solicitor who was only a Blenheim solicitor, and not so eminent as Mr Travers,- 1 wrote a letter about it to a newspaper. Were you apprehended by the police on a charge of lunacy ?—I was. Do you play the fiddle ?—I attempted to play a violin. Amongst fashionable people at Home the instrument is usually called a violin. Did you ‘ attempt’ to play a violin or a concertina in the street at Blenheim ? Not in the street.—l did attempt to play a concertina at a friend’s house. Did you play in the streets at Nelson 1 —I played because I was asked. Who asked you ?—•Well, I will explain. I had just arrived at Blenheim, and it seems the news of my supposed lunacy had travelled to Nelson faster than I did. A number of boys, who had nothing else to do, followed me in the street, and asked me to play ‘ Home, Sweet Home’, and 1 did play it at their request. Did you walk about Nelson in carpet slippers in wet weather ?—Not when I had any boots. When I had none, I walked about in slippers. Were you taken into custody by the police at Nelson ?—Certainly not. Were you cautioned by the police?— Not to my knowledge. Do you know the sergeant of police at Nelson, Mr Nash?—l know a little Irishman there whose name may be Nash. —(Laughter.) Were you ejected from the theatre for disorderly behaviour ? I don’t know what I was ejected for ? Did you carry a gun—perhaps a gun is part of your costume ?—it would not be safe for you to be about if it were. Did you not tell the manager of the National Bank at Nelson that your conduct at Blenheim was in a great measure due to your desire to advertise the firm, and that you had received £SOO to advertise the firm ?—I told him it would have as great effect in making known the name of the firm as if I spent £SOO in advertising it. What was your object in afterwards publishing in Marlborough newspapers a long account of your exploits, signed with your name as manager of the firm?—l did it with an express object. I had been slandeied, and I was not going to stand it. Mr Travers read the lengthy advertisement, offering £5 reward for the name of the person who stole the plaintiff’s hat, ! also stating that he would let the thief

wear the hat, because he (plamuff) had prided himself on keeping a fair pedigree of * stock,’ and would not again wear the same hat, as he did not wish to deteriorate the breed. The advertisement also referred in pointed terras to Mr Dodson, M.H.R., in reference to something said at a meeting of creditors at Blenheim, Being asked if this was his way of advertising the firm, the plaintiff replied that it was his way of giving a Roland for an Oliver. He had been kicked and cuffed by the firm’s customers. One bad spat on him. Another threatened to twist bis lower jaw, knock his face into a mummy, and make him so that his friends would not know him.