SUPREME COURT.-Civil Sesssions

Auckland Star, Volume XXVI, Issue 4415, 8 July 1884, Page 3

SUPREME COURT.-Civil Sesssions

IHoforo His Honor Jlr Justico Gillies).

THIS DAY.

His Honor took his scat at 10 oVloek

Hohia Patuonk v. d O. Davis. —This was a claim to obtain possession of certain land at Wniwharariki—fifteen acres.—-Mr Rochc fort and Mr Speed appeared for the plaintiff; MrK Hesketh appeared for the defendant. Mr Kochofort moved for an adjournment till to-morrow becauso a material witness had not yot arrived from the Great Barrier.—Mr Heskoth had no objection to the adjournment if costs were allowed.—His Honor advised the case to be placed at the bottom of tho list.

W. ViCKKRY v. J. Wigmork.—Mr E. Hesketli for plaintiff; Mr Browning for defendant.—This was a claim for L2OO, balance of account in connection with services rendered in the erection of a saw-mill for defendant at Whangaroa. Tho original claim had been L37S 16i>, mndo up as follows :—LIO for selecting site at Whangaroa, and LI por day of eight hours for lioS days, L3SS 15s for superintending erection of mill, and other amounts of LS 2s Gd and LI ISs Gd.—Defendant had since paid LI7S, leaving balance duo of L2OO Gs. Defendant had paid into Court L 56 2-! fid, alleging I hat was tho total amount duo by him to plaintiff.—lt appeared thatthero was no written agreement between the parties, and ono of tho principal points of difference was whether tho day was to bo ono of ciflit or ten hours. W. Vickory, the plaintiff, gave evidence coneorning tho agreement made between defendant and himself. Ho was engaged by defendant to go to Coromandol to superintend tho taking down of some machinery that defendant had purchased there, and as ho wished to erect a sawmill at Whangaroa, ho (plaintiff) was to sco how much of tho machinery would work in for the sawmill. It was arranged that plaintiff should receive LI per day—clear of all expenses—Auckland time. Ho proceeded to Coromandel on Soptombor 22, ISB2, and remained there till October 7, when ho returned to Auckland at defendant's request for tho purpose of making plans and specifiedtions for tho sawmill. Tho machinery ho took down was gold-mining machinery. From Octobor 7th till October 27th ho was cngafjod on tho plans (produced). Tho additional machinery required was made by Masefiold and Co. On Octobor 27th lio again visited Coromandol for two days for the purposo of taking particulars of a cogwheel. Ho then remained in Auckland till the 13th or 15th of January, and during, that period ho worked for 20 days for Mr Roe, of Coromandel. Ho superintended the making of tho necessary machinery at Maeefield's ; ho always did so.—Witness was lengthily examined concerning the itoms of his account. He had kept his own timo, and when ho worked more than a day of eight hours ho charged for them. Defendant found the men, and they worked ten hours. They could not work without his supervision. Defendant made no objection to his working less than ten hours. Auckland time was eight hours a day. In the shops, if engineers worked two hours ovor they charged for two-and-a-half hours. This was called time-anda-quarter. Ho got hi 3 certificate for the completion of tho work.—Cross-examined by Mr Browning: He was to be paid his expenses whether the mill was put up or not. He charged for the days he was travelling in tho steamer to and from Whangaroa. There was no agreement that ho should get a lump sum of £6 for making the plans, etc. Never agreed to work ten hours a day at I'l per day.—Mr Browning, in opening the case for defendant, said that it was usual in all mills in the country to work ten hours per day, and that agreement was specifically made.—John "Wigmore, the defendant, gavo evidence to tho effect that when Viekery went to look for the site at Whangaroa ho went as a trip, and ail he wanted was his expenses paid. After ho had pulled down tho machinery at Coromandel he was to get £6 for what he could do in Auckland in looking after the balance of the machinery required for the mill. Witness also arranged that plaintiff should erect the mill at Whangaroa as soon as witness was ready. Plaintiff arrived at Whangaroa on January 18, and witness, in presence of Mr Tollerton, asked him if he was willing to work ten hours for £1. Vickery agreed to thic, and never made a claim for overtime. He had offered to pay Mr Vickery £61 before he left Whangaroa, but he (Vickery) declined to accept it.—At this stage the Court adjourned till 2 p.m. The Court resumed at 2 o'clock.

J. ToUarton and A. T. Kneo gave corroborative evidence. This concluded the case for the defence.—His Honor in giving judgment said that he was bound to believe that the agreement require 1 plaintiff to work ten hours per day. He, however, thought tho plaintiff should bo allowed more than £6 for making plans, &c.; he should be allowed, at least, £10 more. The length of time charged by plaintiff for superintending the constriction of the machinery at Masefield'sseemedexhorbitant; but he deserved some consideration for his services in selling tho simpler machinery. Plaintiff would therefore got judgmentfor £20, in ad jit'on to the amonnt paid into Court; coats [in accordance with R.M. Court scale), £2 12a Gd.

[Left sitting.]