COURTS.

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 192, 21 May 1872, Page 3

COURTS.

PO g I CE COURT. - —'Y ester day, Beforj Jackson Keddell, Esq., R.JI.

Drunkenness and Breach op the Peace. —George Henry Hagin was charged with being drunk,and with committing a breach of the peace the previous day in Greystreet.—The defendant pleaded not guilty. —Constables Purcell and Furlong deposed that the accused was very drunk and disorderly.—Mr Hagin said lie was not drunk at all, but he was excited. He called Mr sub-'iispector BuUen, who said Mr Ilagin was drunk, and evidently did not know what he was saying or doing. He wanted witness to send for a doctor, but there was apparently no necessity for it.—Constable Purcell deposed that Hagin was rushing about Grey-street in his shirt sleeves, and seized hold of one man and hit him in the stomach. The people about seemed to be afraid of him, and asked witness to see him home as he feared Ilagin would shoot him.—Hagin said he did strike the man, but he was greatly provoked.—Mr Hu 1 Icn said lie had known Mr Hagin for two years as 1 lie holder of a licensed house, which was very well conducted, and he (Mr Bullen) was very much surprised to see such a person in the state lie was.— The Bench fined him 20s, or 48 hours’ for being drunk, and ordered him to enter into a bond of £25 to keep die peace for the next six months. Drunkenness. Pedicle Moss and Richard Su'Uvan, ch geil with being drunk, weie dealt with in the usual manner.

Absconding Apprentice. —Thomas Edwatd Allen, an indentured apprentice, was brought up on remand, changed with absconding - from the service of Andrew Craig.—Mr Bul'en said the accused had been apprehended iti conscqueir e of information received from Auckland, to which place he applied for the remand of the accused to l e dealt with by the Magistrates there on Wednesday.—The accused iwrde no objection to the application, and was remanded accordingly. Vagrancy. William Aubrey was charged with being found on the night of the 19th, without lawful excuse in a dwell-ing-house, the property of Alexander Fox. —Tiie accused pleaded guilty.—Mr Bullen said the accused was found in an unfinished house in the < ourse of erection for Dr Fox. The accused had lately come from Tapu, and had been employed on board the Challenger. Nothing was known against him.—The accused said lm was very tired and thought he would take a “shake down.”—The R.M. said under the circumstances he would discharge the prisoner with a caution to be more careful in future.

Obstructing the Footpath. — Matthew Cumimns was charged with obstructing the footpath in Mary-gfreet, on the loth inst. by cross-cutting wood on the footpatti. Frederick Wood was charged with a like offence. The defendants said they only occupied a portion of the footpath lor a very short time. There was plenty of room to pass by. Defendants was discharged with a caution. Stealing from a Dwelling. —John William Shandley, the hoy convicted on Saturday of stealing £lO from the dwelling house of John Kenvon was brought up for sentence. The R.M. said he regretted that there was no Reformatory to which the hoy could he sent. From what he had heard from the hoy’s father and others, he was afraid that what he might have to say would not he very attentively listened to. At the same time, he thought it right to say something to him. If there was any school to which prisoner could be sent he would not be sent to gaol- As it was, he should not he doing his duty if he did not sentence him to a term of imprisonment, during which time be would have the opportunity of being visited by ministers of religion. If the hoy had any feeling, he must have felt grieved at the position in which he had placed his parents, and taking the very lowest ground he must know that it was no paying game which he. had taken up. He could have had very little enjoyment of the stolen money, and on liis journey to Auckland and Wainku must have thought that every policeman ho saw would very likely take him into custody. The sentence of the Court was that prisoner he sent to the common goal at Auckland, for two months, and be once privately whipped.

WARDEN’S COURT— Yesterday.

Defon: Jackson Keddell Esq., Warden. The Warden sat at 11 o’clock, and disposed of the cases on the paper as follows :—W. Thornes and others v. Bright Smile G.M.C., adjourned until June 12tli ; 11. Goldsmith v. j. B. Shndmnn, adjourned to 22nd inst. ; Long Drive G.M.C. v. Moanataiari G.M.C.. struck out; Graves Aicken \\ J. H. Stratford, IT. Stratford, E. F. Tole, R. Mills, and S. Alexander, adjourned to 23rd inst. ; Yale of Avoca G. v. J. Brassel, struck out.

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT Yesterday.

Before JACKSON KEDDELL, Esq. IMI. J. Ballots v fc A. Chambers.— This was an action to recover the sum of £2O 16s 8d for services as cook and steward on board the ‘ Clio,’ from 12th January to 17th May, being at the rate of £5 per month. The plaintiff filed a declaration, stating that he believed the defendant was about to proceed in his vessel to the Bay of Islands. When the case was called on the plaintiff did not appear, and the case was struck out. J. T. Morris v. G. 11. Hagin & Others. Mr Macdonald and Mr Tyler for the plaintiff ; Mr Dodd for Hagan ; Mr F. A. Whitaker for T. Barnett.

This was an action between James Thomas Morris, plaintiff, and George Henry Ilagin, Thomas Barnett, John Gwinneth, James Skene, Henry Skene, John Packer Martin, Thomas Goodman Sandes, William Casely, Henry Hayes, Adam McCarroll, and certain other parties formerly known as the Rifle Volunteer Band Committee, defendants, to recover the sum of £4B, for work and labour done and o:i an account stated for services as bandmaster from 12th April, 1870, to 31st March, 1871, at £SO per annum. Of these defendants two only had been served—llAgin and Barnett. Mr Whitaker said that the summons was defective as all persons who were intended te be charged were not mentioned in it. Mr Macdonald said this was unnecessary as any one of several co-contractois could be sued. Mr Whitaker repeated his objection and said all the individuals of the committee slioule have been named, otherwise it could not clearly be seen wliat the contract was.

The R.M. over-ruled the objection. Mr Tyler in opening the case stated that the plaintiff entered into the contract in consequence of a letter leceived from Mr Loveday, on behalf of the Band Committee. This letter, he understood it would he contended, on the other side was written without authority, Lambert W. Loveday deposed : I am a general agent. Was a member of the Rifle Volunteer Band Committee, and acted as Secretary from October, 1869 to 1870. There was much jealousy who should bo president. Capti''.i okene was president for a short time, and then Capt. Barnett, who has been president ever since. I know George Henry Hagin. He acted as a member of the committee from the first. He acted until April, 1871. I know J. T. Morris. lie was as first band-sergeant from Ist November, 1869, unfil lltli April, 1870. His salary commenced from Ist November, 1869 at £1 per week. He acted as leader for about 3 weeks before he took Mr Oughton’s place as bandmaster. He acted up to the time when the bandsmen were ordered to send in their instruments 3 or 4 months ago. From Ist November, 1869, to April, 1870, be was paid. He was not paid to my knowledge from April, 1870, to March 31st, 1871. I was acting as secretary, and should know if he had been paid.Monis was looked to as the .lead of the band by all the committee. To llie best of my belief be was so acting within the knowledge of Captain Barnett. There was one occas’on on Easter Monday, when Mr Morris was written to as the leader of the band relative to the band not turning out. Mr Morris had an bout’s notice given for the band to turn out, orforsome reason to be given. An emergency meeting was called, and Captain Barnett, Mr Lechner, Captain Williams, and others were present. [Mr Whitaker submitted that the minutes should be produced.] This was over-ruled. A letter was written, I believe, by Captain Newby, but before that Mr Morris said the band would not turn out, and one reason that was given for it was the way in which Mr Morris had been treated as to the salary. By Mr Whitaker: Minifies were taken of this meeting, and were signed by the chairman at a subsequent meeting, i was Secretary, and took the upuutcs. Air Whitaker again submitted that the minutes should be produced, and the objection was again overruled. The examination was proceeded with. Something was said about Mr Mortis not being entitled t<> bis salary by law, but in equity, and that it should be paid. The hand subsequently turned out. Mr Mon is lias several times made application -for bis pay. The question has been brought lip on several occasions. Promises have been made to Mr Morris that as soon as they could see their way to get the instruments out of debt they would try and make some arrangement. The letter produced was written by me as secretary of the Band Committee to the plaintiff. Bv Mr D r 'dd : This meeting look place on sonic day prior to Easter Monday. I won’t swear that Mr Hagin was there. He may have ceased to he a member on the 14th February, 1870, but I don’t recollect. The letter produced is mine to Mr Hagin. [Mr Tyler objected to the reception of this as evidence against third parties. The Court sustained the objection.] Mr Ilagin was a member of the Band Committee subsequent to the date of that letter. I could not swear whether the Easter Monday referred to was last Easter Monday. A subsequent appointment was made on the 19th April, 1871. The old appointment did not hold good because Mr Oughton hail been appointed. Mr Oughton left in May or J unc, 1870. Mr Morris received notice on the 11th April, 1870, that Ids services as paid band sergeant would cease. On the 19th April, 1871, he was .fit on pay again. The officers agreed pay for the band themselves, but never did. I know (hat Hagin has paid something, and he brought it up at a meeting, and said only five out of fifteen officers had paid. By Mr Whitaker: I wrote the letter produced on the 291 h October, 1869. It states that the bandmaster’s pay was to be £SO a year. It does not say how long the appointment was to last. He agreed to (he teems. The contract came to an end by the officers holding a meeting and knocking off Morris and appointing Oughton at £6O per year. I was not at (hat meeting. I wrote the letter on the authority of the Band Committee, Corporal Barnett knew of it, and so did Captain Newby. I received instructions from the Band Committee, I won’t swear that Captain Barnett was present on the 29th October, 1869. The present committee had no authority to discharge or appoint a bandmaster without the consent of the meeting. Captain Barnett did net explicitly teil me to write to Mr Morris t< Hiug him that his salary was to be £1 per week. There was a meeting held and a resolution was passed and seconded, and Mr. Barnett instructed me to write. Captain Barnett was a member of the Band Committee regularly appointed by formal resolution. He acted on several occasions by taking part in the discussion at the meetings. I cannot swear that Captain Barnett has ever voted, but I believe be has. Ila lias taken the chair as Band President. The letter of 19th April, 1871, referred to was as follows : Shorthand, April 19, 1871. Sir, —I have the honour to inform you that, in accordance with the instructions received from the Band Committee, you have been appointed Bandmaster of the Thames Rifle Volunteer Band, at a salary of one pound (£1) per week, dating from 12th April, 1871. I have also the honour to inform you that payment of such salary will be monthly, as also one month’s notice on eiul er side shall he determinable. —I have, &c., L..W. Loveday, i Hon. Sec. T.B.C. That of 29th October, 1869, was as follows: Sir, —I have the honour to inform ) 7 ou that, on the recommendation of George Oughton, Esq., honorary bandmaster, the

committee have agreed to nlloML_you a salary of £SO per annum, comm lining from the fust pro:;.— 1 have, &<\, L. W. Loveday, Hon. Sec. T.R.V.B.C. Mr Morris.

Thomas Barnett deposed : The plaintiff Morris was appointed bandmaster in April, 1871. Before that he was bandsergeant. A hand committee was formed. I have been a member the whole of the time. Ido not lemember his being appoviled at a salary in October, 1869. I believe the committee did not authorise Mr Loveday to write that letter of October, 1869. They did not agree to give Mr Morris a salary of £SO. They did promise to remunerate him. They said the} 7 would get up a benefit for him. They did not on any occasion agree to give him a salary until ho was appointed bandmaster. In April, 1871, they agieed to pay £1 per week. Up to that time they owed him no money. Previous to April, 1871, I don’t think the committee had employed him. lam not aware that lie sewed them in any way. Ho blew the cornet. He blew that neither for tho Government nor for the committee. He was bugler for the Government. He blew the cornet for the theatres. The Rifle Volunteers had a band, but we did not recognise it. We may have marched by it. William Lechner was here put into tho box, and stated that he was a member of the old band committee, and had charge of the minute book, which he had handed to Mr Dodd and Mr Whitaker that morning. I have received no orders from Captain Barnett about this'book. I last saw it at Mr Dodd’s office this morning. Mr Dodd and Mr Whitaker here left the Court to fetch the book. Mr Hagin, addressing the Court, said lie had never instructed Mr Dodd to appear for him. Mr Dodd said he would retire from the case.

The R.M. asked if this case could not bo settled by arbitration. Mr Tyler said his client was willling to agree to any reasonable proposition. The R.M. said he thought it was a case which might be well referred to arbitration, at the same time he was perfectly ready to go on, and decide according to the light of the evidence adduced. After some consultation, Mr Whitaker said that Mr Barnett objected to gu to arbitration. The case then proceeded. The witness, Thomas Barnett, went on to say : I have looked at the minutes some little time since. lamin t aware that. Mr Morris served the committee between 1869 and April 1871. He played in the band, hut he was not working for tlie cOmmiitee. I n-ver told him that anything was due, nor sinned anything to that effect. [The minute book was In ro produced, in which there appeared a resolution signed by witness that the Amount due to Mr Morris should be taken into consideration as soon astlieold debts were paid off.] The minute is in Loveday’s writing, and is one of his blunders. I signed in the usual way. The com mittee in November, 1871, « did not consider they owed Mr Morris anything. but tlu'y said they’d pay him. something. On the third November, he sent in an account for £2l, and it was passed. I did not see the account. I was chairman of the meeting. (Account produced.) I remember a benefit being projected at the Academy of Music, in April, 1871, in aid of the Band Fund. I cannot sav whether it came off or not, for I was absent in Auckland at the time. Ido not remember going to the band and guaranteeing that the proceeds of the entertainment should go towards Morris’s back salary. Morris was acting as bandmaster, but lie was not appointed by the committee.

Mr Tyler said he was instructed to say, on behalf of Mr Dodd, that the latter was regularly retained by Mr Hagin, and was surptised at being so unceremoniously dispensed with. He wished to state this, otherwise it would appear to the public that Mr Dodd had appeared without being instructed to appear. By Mr Ilagin : I believe you attended a Band Committee meeting, as the deputy of a senior officer, who was absent. I was not aware that you were disqualified at any time.

The R.M. again suggested that this matter might be settled out of Court, and adjourned the case until the next sitting of the R.M. Court (31st instant).