R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XIII, Issue 4117, 19 May 1892, Page 3

R.M. COURT.

MABTERTON,- THURSDAY,

(Uefore Colonel Huberts, R,M.) * TBI CIVIL L]Bl, Henry Currie v, Chas Gardner, Claim—£6 for the value of a sheep iloi; sold on approvul. Mr Pownall for plaintiff. J udgraenl for the amount claimed, with costs 6s. John Elley v. Patrick Gill. Claim —£Bloa 10(1 for meat supplied. Mr Bunny for defendant, The defendant admitted owing £2 9s lOd and said be had offered to paj this amount long ago. He had, however, been charged overweight for the remainder, Judgment was given for f 2 9s 10(1, without costs, W<tlter Blatchford V, Richard Tratham. 'Claim—£lo for a horse purchased on approval but returned as unsuitable, Mr Beard for the plaintiff, Mr Pownall for the defendant, Several witnesses were called on either side, after which judgment was given for the defendant with costs. Joseph Torraj v. Arthur Peraton— Claim, £2 9s 2d for work and labour done, Mr Pownall for the plaintiff. The sum of £1 Is 8(1 was admitted

ißntl paid into Court. Joseph Torrej, sworn, stated that be had been engatjed through his father to work for Mr Perston. He was cot present when his father had a conversation with Perston. He first engaged himself to work at six shillings a week, and was to receive a rise of a Bhilling a neck every three motitlw. He went on until he received 12s Gd a week. He had been paid at that rate. He had never heard that biß wage*} were to be reduced, His father had received an accouot in which it was stated that be (witness) was during the last eight weeks only receiving ten shillings a week, His father had received a cheque for biß wages, and witness had signed the receipt. No reduction in his wages had evor been made. He was now claiming wages at the rate ol 12s 6d a week. By tho defendant i He had told Mr Perston he wus perfectly eatiefied with his tptpient until March 28th. He jnigjithaye told (hp. defendant (lie jireeent arose out pf a miaunfc Standing. He reiiiemberpd yayjng Mr .jfferston was not. trying to defrtspd pip). Mr Peraton ba'd' told him it bis fathor had not interfered the matter would have. been amicably settled. He had accepted tho account and cheque rendered in January as correct, but afterwards found it was pot, He had made the arrangements himself with Mr Perston regarding the wages. His wages were raised from 10s to 12s 6d a week when be had to get up in the morning and cut firewood. He understood they were to continuo at 12? Gd, The. chrque bad been sent to bis fathor at his own request, . "'. V.■

Junlea Torroy, fatlier of ths plaintiff, deposed that he had agreed for his son to work for the defendant. Perston had been in the habit of sending him the cheques from his buy. He nndemtood his son was to receive 12s Gd a week, and if he fnilpd to get in the horses at six o'clock in the morning he was to he fined a shilling. On the Inst account being received he discovered that tho boy's wages had been reduced to ten shillings. He had not consented to this reduction.

By the defendant: He had said all the arrangements were to be tuade with tho boy himself. He had never been consulted about the wages of his boy. This was llio case for the plaintiff. The defendant stated that the plaintiff had been engaged by him. He: was to receive a rise in wages every three months for three months only. The wages of tho hoy hud lieen laised from ten shillings to twelve and sixpence a week solely on account of extra work which was being done. The boy had rereceived two bonuses for extra work he liad done. Tho wages of the boy weresent to tho lather at the plaintiffs request. This action had been brought by. the plaintiffs father out of spite. He had received several nasty letters and messages from i'oriey. If tho boy had been Wt to settle the matter tho case would never have come to Court,

Judgment was given .for. the plaintiff for £1 Is Bd, the amount paid into Court, with costs,