MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 603, 3 September 1909, Page 9

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

:: !/ -ft 03eforo Mr!%;; G.;' Kiddell; r s:ii;j' -■ '■ t ; .'Fou'r/first.'offending inebriates' furnished "tho : BumV:total of -yesterday's .criminal -.business-.at the .'.Magistr|,(,ciS;Cjsutt.'jXone^was f c6nvicted and-discharged;\afiethe"r"-'fined )10s.",". and i'two- others ss.;'-"in' default 2i'hours'.;ißipilisoDin«nt.-.- ■■'.;■ r ..;. :: ':■■ 'io'[ ;;^|ft||Msi(| |Sf3:::: : : ;':;' v y ';■;■ Si : -X , 21 ■'■' Judtr^tn't.'fotipiaiiitiff '• bV;d«'faulit : of defehd- ; .&nt.'r;was; : giyehv.iri^.tho''/follbwipgVr:undefended; ■ oasa JonesvT:':Tfe ; frHantu.vXtd.v. -£X ] 2i.-. Uason-v? lis.; Dairy-mah':*rid-,']Tarme'rs',: -;'rjhioni.j6urnal.Co., Ltd.; ,v. .James 'MJGii/a'n ]poifi\ini.'itl -lSs.,::costs, lis. i '.vMßieVatd'*'JoKn" Pennington, . A\ Hi'.Xm, costs : £t- is.'itE.'C Gibbons and-CoJ' v.. vimes'i-M.'u'dgway, ''£i ,'7s. ; 9d,' 'costs ,Bs.; ,C. : If.v-Banks.'Xtd.,'v.:-Clapham::and- -lOs! 2d;,',»sts"los.;' tho : Oohimeroial,-Agency,- Ltd, .v. -"WMi-'/H.- Frankpitt,'wE27. 18s. id./: costs :£3 Is.;'Sharland and':Co.,-.Ltd.; v. Blythe and M'L'u'skie, He. 6d.;.costs : M 3s.' T 6d. ~; - .,: } ■-. N : ; :i^':\jraGMEOT;SraMONSES.; : ;: f y'.t^ Isi.the: judgment.;summons:' cases, - : Dr. .' A. . M*Ait]mf oTdered-Lawrence'Driscoll to'pay-: the : .Wellirigton: Gas "Co.';'-Ltd.;' r .a -debt - of: . 2s. Bd.;:'en ; oT-before September .16,: in defajilt-two . tUy's'-imprisonment.:: • >:.-.''■;.•• .':-.;■; ''-'/.: : : f' ':•/■': - : -.; William•.■Grsharii'Walker-'was.prdered,to pay. S«fi«6d;:Son, and BwenrLtd., a debt'-cf .£l-'l3s. M.y>>' »r bef ore.the same.: ddte,; in ' default" twd. '''-« J ■''■'■ .-'*;'":..'■-:.■ :;;. '■'. , .Inf.tke iease,.r!lkabeth Mary'Jacobs-v."'Au-' : '{ru»t : (l!ll«ri : ','debtor '-was erdere'd' to; pay ?'£&■' 10s. Bi.i''.-»n, or Septenibrt- 16,' : the, default. beirig-ene.week's imprisonment,.:-''•:.-'■' • A-debt-«f : ;e2'Ss.;i»wing tdJ.'and E.'Towersly.jibyvHireld Oliver, was-'ordered to.be-paid oi:,6r:bcfoi'i-.September"-14,'.in default" three ■ days^irprisohment;.:;^';' l --i?^:-'"'■'•'• '■':'■ ■■■'• ■"'. Ni;'«rder:.wns'.-mad«" in the case-of -Wise and DeebTe r.- Charlie EvanSy'a debt of. <£12105;6d. :

'" : 0: : ::/ ; ; ; '-I^DUimUAL^CASES.;..f- ; ;-:,'; : ;/:,;' ■0 : - A : ?©INT /ABOTJT .APRENTICSS.;' ; ~': decision' was 'given"• by his Worship TrivA.-'M'Arthur-in tho casd, of tho Inspector •f ;Awards (Mr. -Nowion) v.-,-R. : ; Hannah and' 0».;: Ltd.; represented by-Mr. Blair.' Plaintiff ertght: to recover a penalty : of ■ £10 on, the gr»tthd".; that^defendahts-' had. cdmmitted,, .a. Sr«eK of .tho,.boOHnakers'-.-award:in ; .empibying rVxale; operatives at - less .than. 275...-6 d.. per VipwHtlHA. further '.penalty Of £\0 was / also c)aimed::f6r,another'allogod : breach .of: the simrd,-: the' defendants., havingV on. a -Tuesdayy piid'.Weekly.wages' for a period ending the pre-.'•rio'us.:;SatUrda'yV4hus-retaining two days' pay in',hahd. The'.first.'breach,'was. alleged to bo ngaihst tho;provisions-of-.Clause -.8 (a) of the .award, iwhich: is 'as follows:. whero otherwise specified, the minimum wage for fc:males'■ working "at tho boot and shoeinduslfy and; having --served -five yeots and upwards, ahallbe 75.'6d;:per week." Air the facts of the : ,,east>i-wefe .'admitted, and no: evidence was .'called;,' counsel -for the, defence : relying ■on - a legalv gionnd. that.' tho -. words ","having served' fire":years and. l upw'aras"':'referred "exclusively :-tojNsw Zealand, and.^that,-therefore, service outside of not count.' The operatives ''concerned... had. put; their- service in ■ in-Edgland, and counsel contended were hot eniitledv.,to:.ithe,;benefitsrunder .Clauso, 8.(a).0f , the'-awaid. ..;.:-r".:' ':;'■:- :EM>'Wprship, -after- reviewing ■-.- authorities,- ..- skated'-.that'were.the argument set up by counB*l;;f»r tie,: defence, to prevail,-there would then <be nothing:.to.i prevent, defendant ."■• from introducing: any-number of operatives, "and em- . ploving : them in New Zealand for :five years, ati'less than the minimum wage, as settled by the award... .As.the.award is a.very- recen; one «hd,.as tijie award rates are now-being pajd by the'' respondent, -his' -Worship thought' a- pen-alty.of-JE2.would meet tho caso. The second breach ;was admitted, but, as the award was . ■ftcw:ifeihgi''coiriplied with,'-a penalty.'of only : £1 would be inflicted, ■"-. '■'■''■, :"..'■-'".

AN UNCOMPLETED CONTRACT.''; . - • Beserrod judgment was also delivorcd 'in the case;of Andrew Baiter and Wm. Jno. Brnnifl v. Richard Stratford and Mrs: AnnMartin.jm: claim for. .£lso.as-damages,,■'..'■ '; Th 6 ' statement of claim'set out that, tho plaintiffs- had contracted with the defendants to erect/.four 'houses at Kilbirnie South. for -the sum'iof,,£l7o each, tho proprietors finding alUtimb.er,and doors, and the plaintiffs.finding all '. bthof/m'atorialfi. Plaintiffs • completed two of the Houses, which had been accepted by the (Jafesdaai*- • Defendants then, wrongfully, re-

fused: to allow tho plaintiffs to proceed with the remaining two houses, nlthough tho plaintiffs .wore ready and willing to perform their part of tho:contract.. Tho plaintiffs therefore claimed £150 as damages for breach of contract. In the course of giving judgment, his Worship'said that plaintiffs contracted to • build four houses and supply labour and a certain part of tho materials, for £170 each.' With the .-utmost.'difficulty,- for- financial reasons, they substantially completed -two of tho houses. They constantly worried the defendant'for advances, and the defendant had to guarantee the sub-contractors in nearly all cases. The plaintiffs also left the work on'different occasions, and showed unmistakably their inability to complete tho remaining two .houses without financial assistance from the defendants. In his Warship's opinion the defendant* wore - perfectly justified in refusing any.further such. assistance, and in terminating the contract. Judgment would, therefore, he for tho defendants; with costs. ] •

- CLAIM 'REGARDING ABO AT. • Charles' P. Pearco, painter, Fitehettown,' olaimed from William Agate, Vogeltown, ,the sum of £16. The' plaintiff asserted that fho defendant had taken a boat from him,:. of which ho claimed the return, with £4 damages for wrongful detention, or in default of return £12. making a total of £16. '■-..„■ . His : Worship reserved his"> decision until September 7. . ' Mr. A. Dunn appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. P. W. Jackson for !the defendant.

"WORKMEN AND SUB-CONTRACTORS. , ■ Decision was reserved in.tho case of L. H. C. Riggs, A; B. Riggs, and iT. Rodgers. v. the Hutt Golf Club, claims for .£35 lis. 6d.,' £58 35., and.£l2 14s. respectively. Tho defendant club, holds about £200,-, balance of contractmoneys due to A. F. Riggs, and the action is to prove plaintiffs' rights to workmen's wages. In. the event'of. their claims not being proved the sub-contractors' havo a secondary claim. ■Mr. Dunn appeared for the workers. Mr.. Kirk for the' Golf-Club, and Messrs. Bunny and Fitzgibbbn for the sub-contractors.. (Before Mr.' W. G..Riddell, S.M.) ' ''•;••.-.:-C.VGLB GOODS AND. REPAIRS. : A cycle dealer of Lower Hutt, Georgo Bradley, -"sued 'Albert Clifford for' the'"sum of £3 IDs. ■ cd.jv alleged to be ■ duo for bicycle parts and'repairs. Mr. Toogood, who appeared for plaintiff; produced the books showing tho,do'Uiled entries for repairs dono. and goods sup -plied. For.'tho defence, Mr. Buddie endeavloured to show thnt'.money had been paid.andnot credited,"''and "generally that plaintiffs books were unreliable. His Worship gave judg-: meit for. .plaintiff for the amount claimed,:and costs.,'£! Ss. 6d. '.' ' ■. : ,RENT AND IMPROVEMENTS. /'■Walter C; Wilson (Mr.. Meredith) claimed; from Peter Bell, carpenter (Mr.- O'Lcary), tho-sum'-of.£lßs.'4d."for:.rcnt'alleged to be due.. Defendant preferred a counter-claim for 16s. 6d. for alterations and ; improvements' done to the. house. . .His ■ Worship■ gave' judgment for plaintiff on. the claim, and defendant, on the. counter-claim, leaving defendant to pay a balance of lis. lid.-. Costs Bs. were, allowed to r plaintiff, and 3s..to,defendant. ... -' '/; : CLAIM ,6'N S A' BILL OF SALE. . '•: The -sum of : £26 7s v -sd.' was claimed on ft bill. of. .sale over furniture by Scoullar and Co. .fro'in. Henry' Ernest Leighton and Mies Jean :■ Millard. -. 'The ■■ plaintiff firm, it appeared from the .evidence, had a bill of sale giTen by: one .Wm. Aubrey over the furniture, and they therefore, sued-.Leighton, who .held a sum of. money, . proceeds of au auction of ' tho. furniture conducted by them. Mr, M'Grath,however, who appeared for Miss Uillnd, rtnted; that- - tiki) 'furniture '. was the 'Property ,of • hi» client, and not of Aubrey. His Worship gave judrment for Miss Millard,.with eosts£l 15a., and non-jnittd plaintiffs in their, action' 1 against defendant Leighton, with-coste £1 Is.' Mr. Meet'appe*'r«d for'pliintiffs, and . Mr.; 0. Beer*- for '• dtfendsit -Ltightoa. '