MASTERTON-THURSDAY.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 5, Issue 1410, 21 June 1883, Page 2

MASTERTON-THURSDAY.

Ingram v W. H. Beetham,—Breach of Borough by-laws 'by.'allowing chimney to catch fire. Fined 10s and costs. Same > v Arthur; Harford.—Samo offence, No appearance of defendant, Informant stated that the chimney was very foul and the house close' to another tenement. Fined 20s and coats, R. V. Smith v Charles Broadberit.— Jndgment'summons £i value of a barometer and costs of court. ~.-, Defendant pleaded that the judgment was given for thirty shillings, not four pounds, The Court replied,that the judgment was for 60s and 28s costs, Defendant said he was not in a position to pay the money, , Informant said he could prove that defendant had spent more money than the sum claimed in drink. / ' : Informant: Have you had money out from homo 1 ~ No,. ' . V ; Have you paid Mr Kelleher any money since ? Ihavenot. Have you spent any money in drink since then? ■ . ' I may have done so. The Court: Have you spent this amount of money in unnecessary drinking? .-"' I don't think tint I have, : Informant; I have seen the man drunk every, day for the last twelve months. _; -'.' ' .: '' Defendant: It's a lie! : The Court: Have you been in .business since then? Defendant: Yes. Informant: I believe he stole the barometer himself, ,■ ,\ ;; ; :-; Defendant': You are the 'thief I'" The Court: You had better, drop this. I shall make an order forten shillings a week to be paid. Defendant: I can't afford to pay that. I will submit to five shillings. : Informant agreed to take five shillings and the order was made : accordingly, witn the alternative of 14 days imprisonment. >' : .■■: :.'.■.■.'<

-D.. f,:McCai% ?;.¥;• Neary.Delit £7 4s, : Defendant admitted the claim by letter and offered to pay £1 a month. Judgment for amount" and costs, payable by monthly instalments.

Cornelius Dixon v Thomas K. York, -Debt 13 8s 7d. Judgment foi amount and costs, 0. Christiansen v Thomas Smith Claim £\ 4s, Judgment for amoiinl and costs.." ".'..' : ; : .' rl

Henrietta Eundlettv Thomas Wagg. —Claim £i for wrongful dismissal from service of defendant. ; Mr Beard appeared ior defendant, and admitted that plaintiff was engaged as cook at a pound a week.- ~' <'J Plaintiff deposed that she''acted as" cook for defendant. She was dismissed without notice on the first day, of June. Mrs Wagg refused to give a reason for dismissing:her;. ■;■ . To'Mr Board: Mrs Wagg told her that she could continue as housemaid at the same wages. Had been with Mrs Wagg for two months. Mrs Wagg seemed more civil to her than to the other servants. Had Been at Mr Corbett's first'as cook, afterwards as assistant cook. Mrs Wagg did not complain of her not making -pastry properly.,

Mr Beard : Did you once .stuff a turkey without taking out the inside ? Nothing of the sort! Did the same mishap take place with fowls'! . Not to my knowledge! ■. i Did Mrs Wagg ever say you were unsuitable?. Never in a straightforward manner! What words did Mrs Wagg use when she complained! , ; V She did not growl' much at me; she growled more, atthe other servants! Did she say she would have to get some one'else! : >!";_'; . / [';; ; She never used thVe Woro!s, ; ; You did not continue when Mrs :Wagg. offered you the situation as housemaid 1 ) :<;;::.;:,, , How could I, after being served like 1 was! ! iJChe Court said it did notisee that ; in offering her the place of housemaid any injustice was done to her. With respect to.tlie turkey^,.-. ix ~, ,£,) /. i: • l Plaintiff: 'lt may 'nothaye, .been, properly cleaned, my aucrition'-Mving been drawn off to other matters., . ; Mr'Beard':' If jour Worship is!satisfied I shall not apply for costs;"'''"'.''"' ! *f an employer is justified in degrading a ; servintifroma I Hijgher W a> lovfe? posi-> tion.y : ,-.'i«4.!vsfen : 'A ji; : Mr^Be^rd: I thought that housemaids :werathe'swell!Bervants;7 : /"' J ;V;P v hgebCiWagg 4eppßed: chat; luorfc

night before the plaintiff left she found ut turkey stuffed, but not drawn. She did not dismiss her at all, but offered her a situation as housemaid. She was too dirty to suit her, and so witness used to give her the'rounds of the kitchen.

The Court thought plaintiff ought to have remained a week when she had the opportunity. The terrible blunder about the turkey justified Mrs Wagg in removing her from the kitehen.'*""lt would give judgment against the defendant for one pound, without costs, bb she was entitled to'a week's notice.