RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1670, 8 December 1887, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Temuka—Tuesday, Deo. 6,1887.

[Before A. M. Clark, Esq., J.P.] DRUNKENNESS.

A first offender was charged with drunkenness. The accused pleaded in extenuation that he had only just returned to town after an absence of considerable duration, and his inebriation was due to his meeting with a . large number of friends. The police knew nothing against the accused, and he was dismissed with a serere caution as to his future behaviour.

Wednesday, Dec. 7, 1887. [Before J. M. Ollivier, Esq., E.M.] INSULTING LANGUAGE. Eobert Kelly was charged on the information of Dominick Brown with using abusive language towards him on Thursday, December Ist, such as might have led to a breach of the peace. Defendant pleaded not guilty. Dominick Brown, teacher, South Eangitata, stated that he was sitting in his house on Thursday last, when, at about 6 o’clock, Kelly came into the section, and calling him outside, complained that he had been beating his (defendant’s) children and asked him to come out to fight. When witness declined, defendant said he was afraid. Also made use of an opprobrious epithet towards him and flourished a stick at him. To defendant: Did not thrash your children more than anyone’s else. Only punished them when they deserved it. Had not hurt them. Eobert Kelly, the defendant, was sworn and questioned by His Worship. Could not produce any evidence to show that his children were unduly punished. ihe child that he particularly complained about was not present. Admitted that ha had told Brown that he had thrashed the

children and could now thrash him His Worship thought defendant decidedly in the wrong. He had no right whatever to take the law into his own hands. With regard to the punishment of his children he thought he ought to be glad there was someone to correct them. He would doubtless appreciate it more in later years. He would be fined 20s and costs.

THE LATE AFFILIATION CASE. Mr Wood, instructed by Mr M. J. Lynch, the defendant’s solicitor in the case of Uden v. Husband, applied to have the amount of £3, which was given by defendant to plaintiff for the purchase of baby clothing, allowed as a set-off against the costs allowed at the last sitting of the Court for

nursing, etc. His Worship declined to grant the request. Mr Aspinall asked that the defendant Husband might be required to find sureties for the payment of the maintenance money of the child of which he was adjudged to be the father. His Worship said he would hear the application at the next sitting of the Court.

CIVIL CASES. Job Brown v. Latimer«— Claim £3 10s. Judgment by default was given for £8 5s lid. The sum of 4s Id charged for interest was disallowed.

IMPORTANT CASE. George Dyson v. Arowhenua Town Board—Claim £lO. Mr White for plaintiff and Mr W. G. Aspinall for defendants. Mr White, in opening the case, said that doubtless when the history of New Zealand came to be written it would be recorded that in the year of grace 1886 a Town Board known as the Arowhenua Town Board was constituted, Commissioners were elected, and Mr E. Lee was appointed Chairman of Commissioners. In due course applications for the position of Clerk and Overseer were called for, and the various duties were detailed. The salary was stated by the Chairman to be the munificent sum of £3O per annum. Mr Dyson was one of the applicants for the position, and his application was as followsTo the Chairman and Commissioners Arowhenua Town Board.—Gentlemen —I have the honor to apply for the situation of Clerk and Overseer to your Board, as advertised in the Temuka Leader. I would beg to suggest for your consideration, that as tbe work attached to the office for at least six months would be necessarily heavy, that a small bonus of £lO should be given to the Clerk if the duties are carried out satisfactorily.” No mention was made of salary, and in addition to the work mentioned in the schedule he also acted as Treasurer. Time went on, and his various duties were duly performed. At the end of six months the Board were not in a good financial tposition, and no demand was made for the bonus. In due course the Clerk resignedowing to a disagreement with two members of the Board. Before he resigned he mentioned to a member of the Board the question of the bonus, and he (the member) had promised to bring the matter up at a meeting of the Board. It was brought up and duly considered, and the Board wrote to Mr Dyson to that effect. Application had since been made to the Board for the amount of bonus, and the present action was taken to recover same.

George Dyson produced a copy of the I emtjka Leasee of August 26th, 1886, containing the advertisement for Clerk and Overseer to the Arowhenua Town Board. In reply to it he put in the application produced. Received a verbal intimation from the Chairman that this application was successful. He entered upon his duties at once and continued to serve in that capacity until November Ist. He also acted as Treasurer. Nothing was said in the schedule of duties about the salary. Was paid at the rate of £3O a year—the salary agreed to by resolution. Told the Board it was necessary to have a Treasurer, and, the Chairman demurring to accept the office, he had been appointed. No rates had then been collected. The duties of Treasurer are not part of

those of a Clerk and Overseer. Did not anticapate being asked to act as Treasurer when tendering. To Mr Aspinall: He might have performed the duties of Treasurer even if he had understood that.a bonus would not be paid. To Mr White: He always considered the bonus would be paid. Had a conversation with Mr Edgeler in Mr Heap’s presence. He (Mr Edgeler) had said that he had no doubt whatever that he would receive the bonus. After the question of the bonus had been brought up he bad received a letter from the Board stating that the bonus would not be granted.

To Mr Aspinall: Was aware at the time of application that the salary was to be £3O. Had no idea at that time that the bonus would be granted. Was not sure if he was informed on the night of the meeting that his application would be accepted. Was not certain if he assumed the duties the same evening. Knew the salary was £3O. No mention of the bonus was made at the time of the appointment. Did not ask for the bonus until he handed in his resignation. Was appointed Treasurer subsequently to his appointment. Had not entered into the fidelity bond at tne time. The Temuka Town Board do not give a bonus to the Treasurer.

The duties are about the same. Bead the duties of the Treasurer to tbj? Chairman, who would not them. Hid not sign cheques for the Board. At the conversation with Mr Edgeler the latter was in possession , of all his faculties. He looted upon 1 Edgeler’s statement as an outcome of the Board’s discussion. Could not recollect the time of day when the conversation took place. It was the day the appointment of his successor: was considered. Stayed longer than his legal notice required on account of the auditing of the books. Mentioned the subject of the bonus when he left. At the meeting on the night of the Ist November the Chairman considered he ought to have stayed the whole two years.

To the Bench: Had made the rate roll, collected rates, acted as Overseer, collected dog tax, etc. J. J. Heap was called, but his evidence did not bear upon the case. Mr Aspinall submitted that the plaintiff should be non suited, as he had failed to prove any contract. His Worship took note of the plea, but decided to hear further evidence.

Mr Aspinall called Edward Lee, Chairman of the Arowhenua Town Board : Eecollected the salary of the Overseer being fixed at £3O. Hyson applied after seeing the schedule of duties. His application was accepted. He attended the, meeting when his, application was considered and took the minutes. Hid not remember Mr Hyson pointing out to him the duties ef Treasurer. It had never been discussed. Hyson had done all the clerical work of the Board. The question of bonus was never discussed in Hyson’s presence. After his resignation he made a claim. He asked the Board about the bonus on Ist. On November 16th it came under discussion and was not entertained. It was neveg intended to give a bonus. . Edgelflf had no right to commit the Board fo anything.

To Mr White: Had never coinplained of Dyson. Was not aware of the clauses of the Act relating to the Treasurer. The appointment was made on November 26tb, 1888. Did not anticipate having to reward the Treasurer. Could not recollect when the question of a Treasurer was first brought up. The question of bonus was brought up on the Ist November. Could not say if Dyson would have been entitled to his bonus if he had stayed two years. He might have had a better chance of it. The Board never intended to give a bonus. Witness was here questioned at some length by the Bench with regard to the meaning of a resolution curtailing expenditure. He stated that the resolution had nothing to do with the bonus. The Board at the time ha<U no money, and, pending the settlement of a claim against the Temuka Road Board, were desirous of keeping down every expense. * 1 Charles Story, a member of the Arowhenua Town Board, was also examined as to the question of the bonus. The witness stated that the Board never intended to give it. Dyson had never received any intimation from the Board that no would not receive it.

After hearing counsel, His Worship said that he was of opinion that Mr Dyson had a reasonable claim, and the Board ought to consider it. He could not, however, award the money to Mr Dyson, as there was absence of evidence to prove a contract. The Board had not placed on record their intention of giving Mr Dyson bonus, although it seemed' to has* been implied. He would nonsuit, the plaintiff, but the Board would have to pay costs. The Court then adjourned.

GERALDINE. Geraldine Tuesday, Deo. 6, 1887. [Before E. H. Pearpoint and H. W. Moore, Esq., J.P.’a.] LARCENY. James Wilcocks, on remand from Timaru, was charged with having stolen two sheepskins, valued at 12s, from a railway truck at Orari on 29th November. < Accused pleaded guilty. Two previous convictions were proved against him and a sentence of six months imprisonment with hard labour was imposed.