S.M. COURT.

Bush Advocate, Volume XX, Issue 1004, 16 April 1908, Page 5

S.M. COURT.

I■' m - ! THIS DAY. (Before Mr McCarthy, S.M.) I MAINTENANCE. Michael Ryan was charge"!* with disobedience of a ' maintenauvf or'Ser Ifor the support Of his wife juid oho j child of ;£1 per week. | Mr Lloyd appeared for toijiplainant. .. „ , Samuel Tansleyj;,ot|irk of the court, deposed as to tlie making of the order by Mr Cutten, S.M. No i payments had been made. Some £16 were due on the 3rd April ; no costsI had been paid, making the total sum £18 2s now due. f Defendant's solicitor admitted that nothing had been paid. A notice of motion had been brought forward to have the order varied, and on . this rested the defence. The defendant could not possibly - pay the sum set down for payment. He had a home and was willing that his wife should go home. His client- was an old man, and did not earn £1 per week. Michael Ryan deposed he was a resident of Weber. He carried the Waione mail. Was 51 years old, and was not enjoying good health. Had had 25^acres of land, but had sold it for £375. Also had a one-acre section, valued at £400. There was a mortgage of £600 over the land. Bought cows, but owing to the fac- | tory closing, the cows had been left idle on his hands. A bill of sale was in existence over the cows. If sold I now they would not realise the amount of the bill. Got £oo a year for the mail contract, and it took 10s per week to keep the horse, etc. The wife had 10 acres of land. There was a mortgage over it, with - the other land, intended to pay off the mortgage with the £375 received from the sale of the 25 acres. Could not possibly pay the £1 per week. Could riot possibly keep up two homes. Had his insurance policy to keep up. Paid £2 6s 4d per quarter on it. By Mr Lloyd: Had sold some of the furniture. Gave the piano to his daughter two or three months ago. Told the court that he would" not pay the order. This was all the evidence. The Magistrate, summing up, said, the matter had been fully gone into by Mr Cutten, S.M., recently, and defendant had mid the circumstances were not altered. 1 ' He would dismiss the application to have the order set aside, and convict the defendant of refusing to pay, and sentence him to three months' imprisonment with ; hard labor, the order to be suspended for one week to allow the defendant a chance to pay the arrears. Costs of the present action, £2 2s, were given against defendant. DNDEPEXDED CA&ES. Judgment was given for plaintiff l in the following Undefended cases: — Beddingfield v. Deadman, claim £17 17s Id, costs £2 15s 6d ; G. Steventon (Mr Lloyd) v. Laverock, claim £1 16s 3d, costs ss ; Williams and Kettle (Mr Lloyd) v. W. Brown, clainx £1 17s 6d; costs 15s; J. Jones (Fitzherbert) v. Thomas Curran, claim £6 3s 9d, costs 23s 6d; Feirabend (Mr Fitzherbert) v. W. Lillas, claim 11s Bd, costs ss. JUDGMENT SUMMONS. A. J. Masters v. Joseph White, claim £6 4s. Nw- order made owing to defendant being unable to work through illness. P. Beddingfield v. M. Morrisy, claim £5 13s lOd. Defendant, who has. a family of nine children, said he was not prepared to make an offer and after hearing debtor examined, the Bench ordered the amount to be paid forthwith, or three weeks' imprisonment, the order to be suspended so long as defendant pays £1 per month. His AYorship said that in cases like this, where a man admitted lie spent co much money in liquor, ; and neglected to pay his grocer and butcher, he was not going to let him off. He said that men should pay their debts before they indulged in liquor. DEFENDED CASES. J. Abbott v. H.B. Farmers' Association, claim 17s 6d for driving shee2>. Mr Blakiston appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Lloyd for the defendant company. Josiah Abbott, drover, deposed he was employed by the defendant company to drive 327 sheep to Mangatera and truck them on the 20th March. Took t^ie sheep away from the yards a few minutes after one o'clock. Nothing had been said about the wages to be paid. Had to get a I man to help witness to move the trucks. After trucking the sheep went for wages. Saw a clerk, who promised to post the cheque. About j two weeks later, as the money had not come, went again to the company's office. Waited about two hours, and then saw' the manager, Mr Young, who said that he would not pay the 17s. Gd, as it was too much. _No offer was made. Had been driving for over 15 years. The amount was- th& recognised charge per clay for driving in ■ this district, no half-days being recognised. By Mr Lloyd : Was a little over four hours doing the job. James Olliver, drover, with over 20 years' experience, deposed that 17s 6d was a day's jpay for driving or trucking. Would not have done the job for less. Part of a day counted as a whole day. By Mr Lloyd : They had to take the good days with the bad. A good many days they did not work at all. They had to pay heavy travelling expenses, the upkeep of their horses and dogs. William Pass, a drover, also gave evidence. The practice was to get ]7s 6d for the drive, whether it occupied a day .or. less-- Had been paid 17s 6d by other firms in this town. " ■ ■ Edward G. .Cruiekshank deposed., that the charge of 17s 6d for taking 327 sheep from the' Dannevirke yards to Mangatera and .trucking them was a very reasonable charge. Henry Monteithj stock dealer, also gave corroborative evidence. Mr Lionel, ■for the -defence, <s£ti<l ti>at altliongli tlie sum involved was a small one, the case Was of considerable importance to firms doing business locally. He called James Young, manager -for the H. 8.. Association, who deposed'as to "employing defendant to

truck the siwT°P- Ab 9 jit a fortnight later saw plain*. 1 "-, who w a, nted 1/s 6d for the work tn;™-, The usiial charge paid in the yarci wa .? tor trucking from the yards. TtiC plain- ! tiff said he ■wanted 17s <5d or n.oflm«£Told him that 10s was ihere ready for him. The firm paid os, 7s 6d, and 10s for trucking from the yards. Had never been asked for a full day's pay ifor half a day's work before. The drovers seemed to hare risen their price lately. Had* never been charged more than 10s for part of a day's work. The 17s 6d charge was ' preposterous. ■ James T. McDermott, clerk in the employ of the H.B. Farmers' Association, deposed that he employed Abbot to-take the sheep and truck them at Mangatera about 1.30 or 1.45. Next day plaintiff came and asked for his money, wanted 17s 6d. Told him that there was 10s for him. Abbott refused this, and said he wanted 17s 6d or nothing. . .. Alexander McKenzie, drover, deposed that a drover's wage was 17s 6(1 a day, even if he had only done .two hours' work, if he could get it. Had done an afternoon's work for 10s. Done odd jobs by arrangement but never for less than 10s. Most jobs like Abbott's were done for 10s. Was employed by the Gear Co. at 10s per day and found. William Bain, auctioneer for the N.Z. Loan and Mercantile Agency Co. at Dannevirke, deposed that his firm frequently had sheep taken to Mangatera to be trucked. Never paid more than 10s for trucking any number of sheep up to 400. Thought 10s was a. very reasonable . charge for what Abbott had done. - Charles Hawkins, dealer, of Palmerston North, deposed he had never paid a full day's p.ay for half avday's work. Never paid more than. 10s per day for droving. Ten shillings was too much for what Abbott had done. •; ■ By Mr Blakiston : Was the person on whom Abbott's charge would fall. ; Thought that the company had ehaiged witness 17s 6d for the driving, but I would not be. certain Alfred William Perkins, manager for Dalgety and. Co., Dannevirke, deposed his firm employed drovers. Never made an arrangement. If #iey^ .were overcharged they did ; not dispute it, but paid up, and did noi the man again. The custom 'in the South .Island, was, to pay 10s per day arid pay for the men's meals. Mr Lloyd stated that the company had only charged Hawking yvit)i 10is for the droring. Thomas James McDermott deposed that 10s would be a fair thing 1 to charge for what Abbott had done. Had never received a full day's pay for half a day's work, nor had lie paid a full day's pay for half a day's work. Had earned as much as 25s a day for -doing several small jobs. The recognised charge was 17s od per day. Never charged more than 10s for half a day's drive. This concluded the evidence. His Worship said that it was not a question of custom in the case, but J whether the charge was a reasonable one. A drover's work was not constant, and he had to maintain a horse and- dogs. In this case the work had been completed in three hours, and the plaintiff had to employ a man to help him. He did not think the charge was an unreasonable one. and as the case was of great interest to farmers and drovers, he would allow professional expenses. ' The costs amounted to £3 os. Anderson and Sons (Mr Patterson) v. W. Cadwaller, claim £23 10s. The claim was for the hire of a waggon at 10s per week since April 12, 1907, to the present date. After considerable evidence liad been heard, judgment was given for plaintiff for the amount claimed and £4 2s costs.