R. M. COURT, ALEXANDRA.

Waikato Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2256, 23 December 1886, Page 2

R. M. COURT, ALEXANDRA.

Tubsdat.— (Before Mr H. W. Northcroft, € KM.) T. Hughes v. Para KoußANaA.—Judgement summons. Adjourned until the 31st inst. Malmburg v. Sage.— Claim £26. Mr W. M. Hay appeared for defendant, F. Malmburg, Rworn, deposed : In tho middle of November, 1885, I was working at Te Awamutu when Sage come to mo and asked me to join him as a partner ia some roads and bridge work, I to do the wond work. Ho asked mo to come down to Alexandra to make up the quantities and estimate the amount of timber required. I came down and did ho. When I saw him after his t^ndpr was accepted he said my name was not in it, but that I should have the wood work at the amount I estimated for. The tender was hont in about the 3rd December, and was accepted about the loth February. He came to me for an agieemenc between v«. Mr Gresham made one out, but it was not signed by either of us. I made out the quantities and description of timber required, and went to Auckland to purchase pipes required for the work. Then I thought I had no agreement, and asked Sago for one. We agreed that Mr Wickham should draw out one. We asjked him to do it. I cold him to draw it out the same way as Mr Gresham. Next morning myself and Mr Wickham went to Sage's house to get it signed. It was specified in the agreement "that no money was to be paid without my presence." When Sage saw this he said " he would see me b first before he would sign it." Afterwards he asked me ''if I would go on with the work." I said "yes, on tho-e terms." Afterwards I got the pipes in my name for the work, which I had to pay for. On the 13th February he asked me, as there was a cheap train that day, to go to Auckland and he would get my name put in the tender. We sent and saw Mr Percy Smith, who said it was too late to do that, but we could have a private agreement ' between ourselves. Can I look at my book for dates ? Mr Northcroft : Yes, but you must hand that or any documents you wish to read to Mr Hay. Book handed to and examined by Mr Hay. By Mr Hay : All entrips are from day to day. Ou the 4th March I went to Auckland for pipes and other things lequiml to carry out the contract, and on the 20th to Cambridge for totara timber. On the 25th I went to Te Awamntn to unload timber. Witness gave an account of various other works performed by him on the defendant's account. To the court : The total amount of my claim is £26 odd. The first item in the particulars is wrong as charged £3 ss. It should be £1 §s 6\i. It is an error. My claim should be £24 10s. By Mr Hay : The total amount I estimated for the timber work, including labour, carriage, spikes, tar, etc., was £247 17s (id. I applied some time since to Mr Sage for money. I never applied to him through any other person. I never authorised Mr O'Neill, of Hamilton, to apply to Sagp for money on my account. Mr Hay to court (handing in a document) : The court will see here is an applicition for money from Mr O'Neill with the same items as in the plaintiff's bill of particulars now before the court. The court will recognise Mr O'Neill's ban i- writing. Witness : I went to Mr O'Neill and s>poke to him about my claim on Sage, but I did not employ him, I never heard from him afterwards. Sago asked me to go t ) Auckland. I did not jr.) on my piivate accoim I*.1 *. He sent mo to George Smith at Kaniwhannvha to enquire about totara. Ho sont mo to see Jordon. He sent me to Ngaruawahia. Ho sent me to Papakura. I was trying to get the timber required for the contract as cheap as I could. People refused Sago's order for timber. I made out the estimates, thinking I was to have the work, as a partner He said afterwards he would not give it nu>. j He had employed two men to do tha earthwork for £22 which I objected to. I stayed at Sage's. The account ho puts in as a set off is incorrect, he charges mo coach fare.s at 4<, whpn at th >t timi; he a\as advertising his at 2s Gd. Hero wittieas objected to other itPUIS. Jes-se Sage sworn and examined by Mr Hay, deposed that he had never employed Malm burg to take out the quantities, n^ver employed him to go to Auckland or elsewhere, had met Malm burg in Te Awamutu, and told him there was a job to i c pot on tho Hikurangi roid, but th it lin did not understand the woodwork — the biidge work. That if he liked to take that I would tender. Hengieed and estimated to do it for £217 10s. He was to pvv me 2s a hundred for carting the timber t-> Alexandra, and Is to the work. He ran ab ut trying to get the timber and could not get it. I saw him in Auckland as I was going to the survey office to see Mi .Smith, and he talked me over to let him sjo in partner in the contract, but Mr Smith said it could not be done. Malmburg got a lot of things but I never employed him, it was all on his own account. I did say I would allow him an extra £5 on the timber. I had employed men on the earthwork who we-e losing a Jot of tinrje through plaintiff not going on with the timber work. I afterwards got Mr Meredith to do the work. I have lost £40 on th« contract all through Malmburg. My s^t off is correctIt amounts to £12 4s lOd. Plaintiff was cross-examined but did not alter the evidence. John Bayliss sworn, and examined by Mr Hay— l remember being called by Sage and Malmburg when they were talking about the contract. I was engaged in the work, and waiting for Malinb'irgh to cotnmeuco. I asked plaintiff when he was going to begjn, he said, he should chuck the job up. Sage offered him £5 extra. Next day J asked h'm again. He said he would take the job if Sage would cart the timber for- nothing. The Court nonsuited plaintiff with oosts i(> 3s. This was all the business.