(Before Mr T. A. B. Bailey, S.M., and Mr H. Ward, J.P.)
■ A first offender ! for drunkenness pleaded guilty. and was fined ss. . Application for Prohibition Order. The police made application for a prohibition order to be made against James McCrenor on account of excessive drinking. McCrenor was represented by Mr A. T. Donnelly, who opposed the order being made. Constable John Harvey, at present stationed at Methven, said, he had known McCrenor for one or two months. He was addicted to drmk, and when he was intoxicated he became very abusive. By Mr Donnelly: Witness had seen McCrenor under the influence of liquor on two occasions only. Constable Patrick Moore, stationed at Methven, said he had known the defendant for six years, and during that period he had seen him drinking in hotels on many occasions. Witness had arrested him on one occasion for 'oeing drunk, and within the last two years he had twice been bound over to
keep the peace. Complaints had been made by hotelkeepers of McGrenor's demeanour when drinking. He.was a source of trouble to others when in drink. The application was adjourned for six months in order to see how McCrenor behaved himself in the meantime. Breaches of Prohibition Orders. Michael Lineham was charged with a breach of a prohibition order. He made no appearance. —After Constable P. Moore had given evidence as to the making of the order, the case was adjourned to Christchurch for the purpose of taking further evidence. James Conalty (Mr Kennedy) did not appear to answer a similar charge. Kennedy said he had been asked to appear on the defendant's behalf by his employer. The breach was admitted, but the man was now working at a place where it would be almost impossible for him to get liquor. He w.ould be thus engaged for two years.— A fine of 20s and costs was imposed. Failing to Render Personal Service. The Defence Department proceeded against David Ross, Alexander McLean, George Ernest Richards, William Coleman Cooke, and William Withell for failing to render personal service. Ross, who did not appear, had been convicted before. He was fined 20s and costs. McLean pleaded guilty and said that he was-harvesting--and could not possibly attend the parade.—SergeantMajor Mortimer-Thatcher said that McLean had missed a good many parades, but when he did put in ah appearance he was not much good and gave a lot of trouble.—He was fined 10s and costs. Richards did not appear to answer the charge, and was mulcted in the sum of 20s and costs. Cooke did not attend, but SergeantMaior Shepherd said that he had now leftHhe district and the case was withdrawn. Withell sent an excuse for not appearing, stating that he was busy harvesting. He was convicted and ordered to pay costs. A Farm Hand's CBaim. George . Christie (Mr Buchanan) claimed from Oscar Edward Newton the sum of £10, alleged to be an account .owing to him by way of harvesting work done and wages, due for a period of four weeks. The plaintiff, George Christie, said he had worked for the defendant from December 16 to February 2—a period of seven : weeks. His wages were to be 30s per week and a harvest bonus of £8. He had received £4 10s of his wages. On February 2, the harvest was half finished. On that day he came home with his horses and unharnessed them. The defendant had. asked him to unharness the horses of another man who was being paid at per hour. This witness refused to do, as he considered that it was not part of his work. The defendant then said that he was no good to him if he did not do what he was told and suggested that he, should leave. In reply to the .Magistrate, witness said the job would have taken five minutes to do. .The Magistrate then remarked: "Is that the way you !generally treat your master?" In his (the Magistrate's) opinion the permanent man always had to look after the horses. The men paid .by the hour only worked in the paddocks. Oscar Edward Newton (the defendant) said his contract Avith the plaintiff was to do general harvest work and look after six horses at a weekly wage of 30s and a harvest bonus of £8. He had asked him :'to'<,.take>.the harness off the three horses, which he refused to do. He had then said to the plaintiff that he.was no good to him. The next morning, the plaintiff did not offer to get up to go to work and witness had offered him £6, as. wages. The plaintiff, however, refused to sign the receipt. Christie had caused him a great deal of inconvenience, and he had only worked through one week of the harvesting. . The Magistrate said that the plaintiff had gone about his business in a very high-handed . way indeed. He did ! not think he was entitled to' a bonus. Judgment was given for plaintiff for £6, with costs amounting to £1 18s.
Permanent link to this item
Ashburton Guardian, Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXIII, Issue 8805, 27 February 1914
METHVEN—THURSDAY. Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXIII, Issue 8805, 27 February 1914
Using This Item
See our copyright guide for information on how you may use this title.