R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4469, 13 July 1893, Page 2

R.M. COURT.

MABTKRTON.-THURBDAY. (Before Mr T. Hutchison R.M.) CIVIL LIST. J. MoKeniw v. W. Smith. Claim, £2 16a. Judgment with coats. Thompson v. W. Neill, MrPoff. nail for plaimid naked for an adjournment .'oenabled settlement'. Granted. Luoy Brown v. Paul Sorgato. Claim LI 14s lor board, Mr Pownall for plaintiff. Ju'ltnwit with costs. Lucy Brown v. Hmry Brown. Claim £2; bdlsnce of account for board. Judgment with costs. ' Falloon Bros. v. H. Goodin. Cluim £5 5s for Bervice of entire, Mr Pownall for plaintiffs. Judgment with coals.

Eton y. Bui slein. Claim £1 6s 6d for goods supplied, Judgment with costs.

G. G. Cork v. U. Clapham. Olaim £lB 6s for rent of the Matoton Theatre Royal. Judgment with costs, Mr Pownall appeared for plaintiff.

Hood and Johnston .v. H. Clapham. Claim U 4s for the hire of a piauo. Mr Pownall for plaintiffs. Judgment withoosts.

J. Smith v. G. Gordon, Claim for balance of wages. Mr Jackson for plaintiff, Mr Pownall for defendant.

John Smith stated he started work on the 21st April at bnsbfelling, Gordon agreeing to pay 25s per week after the first week. He had heeu laid up a weik through an accident. By Mr Pownall; Would swear he had not told people in Masterton that he would be satisfied to accept £1 a week if paid while laid up. Mr Pownall, for the defendant, said the defenoe wnsvory simple, The plaintiff claimed wages for tho time he was not working. The accident whs unfortunate, but it was absurd for the plaintiff to expeot payment when not working. There was alio no agreement.

George Gordon swore that no ar» rangement about wages bad ever beon made between him and Smith, He had simply promised to give plaintiff what he was worth. Plaintiff was only worth £1 a week and tucker. The four weeks allowed him included three days on which he was uot work' ling. Alf Andrews called by defendant said it mb not usual to make agreements as to wages with men to fall bush, unless they were known. Hardly considered that plaintiff was worth 15s per week. The Bench in giving judgment said that no speoial agreement appeared to exist as staled oy plaintiff. The defendant, he did not consider, was liable for the. week that Smith was not working. Judgment would be for the amount paid into' the Court. Alter argument half costs were allowed to plaintiff, Dakin v. O'Dwyer. Mr Beard for plaintiff, Claim £32 B*, for w>iges and work done by contract. Judg* ment with costs £7 lis.