SECOND EDITION.

Bush Advocate, Volume XVIII, Issue 570, 16 November 1906, Page 5

SECOND EDITION.

S.M. COURT. + This Day. (Before Mr W, P. James, S.M.) Judgement was given for plaintiff with costs in the following undefended civil cases: — * . McKibbin and Co. (Mr Downes) v. Nellie Haley, claim £2 14s 3d, costs 21s 6d ; W. Light (Mr Lloyd) v. L. Gammeltoff, claim £Z, costs 18s 6d ; E. Lloyd (Mr Lloyd) v. A. Tyschen, claim £1 10s, costs 10s ; Ji G. Davidson (Mr Lloyd) v. J. W. Stewart, claim M 11s, costs 38s 6d ; Johnston and Co. v. G. F. Smith, claim £2 Bs, costs ss ; Calder; Drummond and Co. (Mr Blakiston) v. W. Batten, claim £4 8s 3d, costs 23s 6d; Beatie, Lang and Co; (Mr Downes) v. A. Parker, claim £16 , 16s 6d, cost 30s 6d; GordoD, Channon and Co. (Mr Downes) v. Bert Howard, claim £8 Is Bd, costs 23s 6d; W. Snell (Mr Downes) v. Neil Carmichael, senr., claim £15 19s 2d, costs 35s 6d; Tiratu Sawmill Co v E. G. Pointon, : claim £63 4s 9d, costs £1 10s ; same v Thomas Cross, claim, £9 19s, costs 8s; W. Haines (Mr Blakiston) v A. L McDu£f, claim j£lß 18s 9d, costs 30s 6d. JtfD^SIEiTT SUMMONSES, J. Halliganv L. Gammeltoft, claim £3 3s. Ordered to pay> forthwith, in default seven days' imprisonment, order suspended for seven days. W. E. Combs v Taki Tawhai, claim £16 Is6d. Mr Patterson appeared for the judgment creditor, who stated that he had only earned £4 7s since the judgment was obtained. He was not in a position to pay anything off the debt. — Adjourned till first court day in March. W. E. Combs v Ihaka Eoutaki. claim £7 Bs\6d. Mr Patterson appeared for the judgment creditor, and examined the debtor as to his financial position.— No order made. POLICE CASES. t-\ John Thomas Neilson was charged with the theft of a bicycle, the property of Herbert Samuel Tremaine. Sergfe. Cruickshank prosecuted and explained the circumstances, and his Worship, after severely reprimanding accused, admitted him, to probation for six months. DEFENDED CASES. W. T. C. Webb v Dora Stevenson, claim 14a. Mr Downes appeared for the defence, and plaintiff conducted his own case. Plaintiff deposed that defendant's sister came to his place and ordered four pairs of ducks. Witness said he could not supply 4 pair, but could give her 2 pair and the balance of fowls, and the price would depend on the weight He killed one pair of ducks and fowls, and when killed they weighed 28lbs. He delivered them and told Miss Stevenson >• that the price would be 6d' : per Ib. \ $he objected to pay this, and he offered 1 to take 12s. She offered him 10s, which he objected to take. On the following monning he was waited on by a *ypung man, who said Miss Stevenson Irad sent him to either return the poultry or hand over the 10s. Witness refused to take the poultry or the 10s. He wrote to Miss Stevenson, telling her that the poultry was at his place at her risk. They lay there for 10 days and then he buried them. The price asked, 6d per lb, was fair and reasonable. To Mr Potts: Defendant did not refuse to take the poultry when he left them with her. She only refused to give 14s for them. Defendant in her evidence (the most of which was inaudible) was understood to deny in a general way the evidence of the plaintiff, and her sister stated she only went to enquire the price of the ducks and did not order them. Plaintiff non-suited. William Snell v. M. . Eyan, claim £7 13s lid. ' ' j Mr Downes appeared for plaintiff and Mr Blakistoa for the defendant, who claimed that the debt was contracted by Mrs Ryan. Adjourned till nest court day to enable Mrs Eyan's name to be added to the claim. Buick and Eussell v. E. Gallichan, £5 for advertising. Mr Blakiston appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr Downes for the defence. Evidence was given for plaintiffs by T. L. Buickl J. E. Eussell, and j. Coombe, which went to show that defendant had entered into a contract with Messrs Nash and Coombe to advertise in the Advocate. Mr Downes raised the technical point that a proper assignment of the debt from Messrs Nash and Coombe to the plaintiffs had not been made. This covered a sum of £3, and judgment was given with costs, for £2. ! Skelley v. Gurr, a claim for J6130 8s 8d for alleged wrongful dismissal. Mr Lloyd appeared for the plaintiff and Mr Blakiston for the defendant. Mr Lloyd, in stating his case, read and put in the various letters and telegrams which passed between the parties prior to, and confirming, theengagement of plaintiff as defendant's managing clerk. Claud H. T. Skelly deposed that he was an insurance clerk, till lately in the employ of defendant. Prior to that he was employed by the Standard Insurance Office (5 years); and with the State Fire Office (12 months) ; Imperial Office (2 years) ; and he was bookkeeper for the Dresden Piano Co. He heard that Mr Gurr was in need of an insurance clerk, and he wrote to him asking for further particulars In reply Mr Gurr interviewed him personally in Welling, ton. Witness askedJMr Gurr if he had a shop, as he would not serve in a shop. Gurr replied that he had no shop, but had a bond in Napier and a branch at Hastings. Witness also declined to do any canvassing, and defendant said he did all the outside work himself. Gurr offered him a week and a share in the general profits of the business after the end of the first year. Witness did not accept the position at once, but asked for time to consider.

Two days later he did accept, and sent in d formal application on May 9th, stipulating for a salary of dGIS6 per year. After he had given notice to the State Fire Office he received awire from Gurr fixing the salary at £150. As he had resigned his position he had no option but to accept, and arrived in Dannevirke on June Bth, and commenced work at once. He found the State Fire insurance work in a very backwark state. „He had brought this work up to date in three weeks by working a good deal' of overtime. He then asked foi?,. leave of absence to go to Carterton and.Wellington, to which Mr Gurr agreed., ;On,his return he found a letter (produced)' on his t able. The letter was from Mr Gurr, and it complained; of the manner in which he had been doing his wort and attending at the office ; also fixing the hours of attendance at the office. Witness then asked to see Mr Gurr, and requested him to sign the agreement which he had undertaken to sign on witness' arrival in Dannevirke. Gurr said he would not sign it, but would not depart from it, as be was a man of his word. He also mentioned that he would get a Bank of New Zealand agreement form and draw up an, agreement from that. Things did. not go on smoothly after that, and he subsequently had* another interview with Mr Gurr, when he declined to go out canvassing, as he did not come to Dannevirke to do that work He observed the office hours carefully. He arrived punctually, but did not leave punctually. Mr Gurr's conduct towards him rendered his position extremely unpleasant. When they were shifting office he saw the copies of the two letters he had written to Mr Gurr, and took them to copy them. On arrival at Dannevirke he found that Mr Gurr's business was not as represented to him. There was no bond at Napier, no branch at Hastings, and there was a shop which he had been told did not exist. ' On October v 24th Mr Gurr placed certain files before him and asked him to find the letters which witness had removed. Witness replied that they were not there, as he had them away getting of them. Mr Gurr ,reniarkje!&< " Well, Skelly, I am sorry for you^" and went out and brought in 1 Sergeant Cruickshank. In the presence of the Sergeant witness explained that as Mr Gurr had refused to sign the agreement with him he felt justified in taking the letters to. copy in self defence. Mr Gurr then told him to pack up his private papers and go. Witness did. not consider that he had left any "prospects" to come to Dannevirke. He had made several applications for employment since he left Gurr, but had not succeeded in getting any. Cross-examined by Mr Blakiston : A letter from Mr Gurr to Mr Brindley, manager of State Fire Department, was not treated as private, but was filed in the office in the usual way. To the Bench : Mr Brindley was aware that I was acting on Mr Gurr's letter, when I sent in my resignation. To Mr Blakiston : Was a thoroughly experienced insurance clerk and bookkeeper Was quite sure Mr Gurr told witness that he had not any need of a bookkeeper. He gave witness to understand that he was perfectly satisfied with Miss Jackson. Mr Gurr told witness he started work at seven. Had expected that there would be a reasonable amount of overtime, and regarded Mr Gurr's statement that he commenced work so early in the morning as a very healthy sign, showing that Mr Gurr had a prosperous business. Could not say that he (witness) had exercised a general supervision over the insurance work, as he had ascertained that there was correspondence going on between Mr Gurr and the General Manager of the State Fire which he was not permitted to see. Mr Blakiston" here submitted a number of letters from Mr Brindley to Mr Gurr. Plaintiff admitted having seen them all. The majority of them were comments or remarks in .respect to proposals sent ; witness did not make out many of the proposals referred to. A letter from Brindley to Gurr was read, in which the General Manager commented on the manner in which the fire insurance business was being conducted ; witness would swear that Gurr interviewed the proposer in respect to the proposal for insurance complained of. It was unusual to take out proposals unless an inspection had been previously made. (Left sitting.)