MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 749, 23 February 1910, Page 7

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

S.S. ARAPAWA MAKES A "CALL." . WHAT DOES THE WORD MEAN P ; (Beforo Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M.)-,. . Alleging that : a breach, of the Seamen's' Award, dated April 4,1005, hail beeji committed in cpnnection with a visit of the steamer Arapawa to Picton, the , Australasian Federated. Seamen's Union brought a charge'against 't|ip owners of-thp vessel, tlip Pnteai Shipping ;Company, .Ltd, Mr. f. W, .Young, appeared for the plaintiff' luiiori, and. Mr. A. ii.'.Hefdnian for .the defendant company.

.Tlie union clninied XlO from the company as penalty under the award, . Tho alleged breach was that the steamer Arapawa having arrived at Picton from. The Grovo on Sunday,, November 28, .and Sailed, again tlie' samo day,;the shippingcompany had. declined to pay tho crew of the steamer the'.minimum of fpur hours' overtime, aV was required by Clause 31 of tho award, ! ' :

Mr, Young said that the stepmer callcd at Picton Pn thp Saturday ovpriiiig, picked up two wharf labourers,' and proceeded, to The Grove, 6J miles from Picton, at:tho head of Queen Charlotte Sound. She arnvod (it The Grove at 7.15 p.pi., and worked cargo until 1.30 a,in. on the Sunday, Returning to Picton at 2.15 a.m., she yent. alongside.'the wharf, landtd tho two wharf .labourer?,-'backed out', again, and, proceeded .to. sea., The- union claiincd that the steamer went in and out of-Pic-ton .on the Sunday, but the owners had rofused to pay'.to the crew the minimum offour . hours' .overtime. : ; The men had been - paid overtime for, tho actual- time .worked at The Grove on the Sunday morn:' ing, and'the amount involved in the present case was: not more' than . 21s; Five deck hands and two fireinen wore concernod in the-matter. , , -

: The evidence of George gelby^A.B.,-was that.the Arapawa had notiihporpd at thp wharf, but had pome' alongside, for a moinent so; that tho yrharf Jabpuiers inigh-t lunip off,

Mr.- Herdman said that .the company. v, '2s defending tho case on principle., In order, to "ejitcr" or "call at" a port, a vqssel mutt nioo.r or anchor for, the pur-' pose, of loading; pr: discharging cargo,; or picking up, or leaving passengers. .The. company argiiod that' the .vessel had not called at Picton .at all, She-.had arrived at. TIIO Grovo -pn> Saturday" and -left on' .Sunday. Another point- of the "defoncp was that Tho Grove was,really part'of-the port of. Picton. In- Gazette:'regulations of 1868,. ; ,th0' .-boundary, limit, of the 'Port of picton" was given as a.straight lino running : north .from Dipping • Buck Point to the opposite shpro. - , The Grove wos_ included within that lino. Petone, pay's gay, and:Evahs Bay occupied similar positions in relation to-Wellington as did The Grova lo Picton; - : i v

;. The,magistrate remarked, that the Ship-, ping and Seamen's Act made no distinction between merely touching at a. port; and finally-tying up.": He >vas inclined to tho opinion that the award contemplated some work being done at tho port before the: crew became entitled to' payment of four hours', overtime,, v " v .. - The captain of the steamer,- George B.' .Corby; ■■■ statetl ■ that the wharf labourers paid no-fare, on the'steamer from Tho Grove to I'ioton. . '

Mr. Young contended tliat tho wharf labourers came within ~tho definition Vof •''passenKDrs.-f. - Tho union did not admit :that,.-for the 'purposes 'of; tho '-award. The Grovo was :part of ;the 'port of Picton.' In tho' ' case'. of" "the steamer Herald; - which. : 'anchored'-iu::Manukau Harbour,' Mr. 'Justico Cooper: had held, tliat■'she - was' at;sea, for the. purposes of tho award,' having merely .'dropped her anchor in tho course of her voyage. Slio would hot. "call at"- a 1 port, ■ gaid the judge,-';until :sho'-tied.' up.'at: Onehunga' Wharf. . In prder.'-to,' entitle crow - to. tho. iqinimum of 'four hoars* overtime, it ; was' only, necessary for : thef vessely,-.to enter j (ind leavo,- a. port on : No; :'wor)v.' ncefl<ibai(lou« - If :.Mr. .'Herclmaii's' argument were . correct, tho- award. might •be evaded easily. ; .A : 'steamer, might .como, lintb'tf roadstead;'(lischargq jiLtos-a-lighter;) going; 'dead.-slow all' the' time; " and-y«t not make any'.'.'call".at a port.. '' ' ... The reserved his decision. :

JIOHSp CAME TO GRIEF-

(Before Jlr. W; 11. Ilaselden, S.M.) ■!.

The : story of : horse that/ fell do^iv a. bank ancl broke ;its' neck oh- the rgad to tho .Terrace'Gaoi--was"told in the caso of John -V; • l?yke,. : horsQ : : d'eak'r,; Versus Frank 'M'Parland ? - baker, of' Tarap?}ti . Street,-." Tlio'claim '\vas'' for .J515," in connection witt the loss of the horse, wliich had- been hired by .the 'defendant- from .the: plaintiif.. ;Tl)cro' vas a,'cross action brought' by M'Parland, against Dyke, in which --JC23 ' 2s. . 6(1. ,' 'was" claimed - for ■damage to the cart. • : - .' .Mr.: Beers'? appeared for Dyke, and Mr. M'Grath for. JCTarlaml. t ■ .v The arose out of an accident to tho horse'.'ami part, which resulted7in the loss of the. horse. ; While . pulling the cart, containing;. 140. loaves/ up the hill, backed; down the private',street leading ,to the. gaol, and • fell over an enb.anjcment .into Woolcombo Street.

. Tiiei eyidcnce ;adduced, by - Dyke.'! w that" the roatUivasdangerous; and- that only.' a. skilled ; driver was justified in using it,. Witnesses brought by the other party stated that the hprso habitually "jibbed", and .: that the, spcidept.. was - caused , by "jibbing." '.' - The magistrate. reserved decision for a week, intifflating: that be would visit, tho locality. •

EECOVERING GOODS BY FORCE. ;! "I am not prepared to say under what, circumstances a. person: may enter ' on' the'premises of another and take by force chattels. originslly bolonpng - to.': him. - I do.'not think any satisfactory rule has. been formulated., ! Tho; remark was made by Mr. Haaclden, in -deoiding , tlie cose-of' the -South ; Paoifio'' Mortgage and .Deposit. Company, Ltd.. v. I,; E. i Ifizracke, general .dealer.: Tho plaintiff- company. claimed JB18; 8s;, : and defendantl 55. ; On the claim, : . judgment 'had . already' been given : for plaintiff' for. <£5 4s. 3d.(with 20s. Gd. .costs), by consent.-,rln re--gard to the counterclaim,' on which-judg-ment had been reserved, a certain parfy had assigned some furniture 'and othfr goods to the plaintiff company, and then, sold ithp.goods to defendant, :The poinif in dispute was; whether the real .owner of ..the goods ,was entitled to go on to thefrejnises of a second ..party :and . recover is property by force. The.. magistrate, failed to sec, that force had been used, and he gave judgment, on the counterolaim, for the plaintiff company, with lis, costs. ; : ':■. .. r ' HOTEL- SALE AND COMMISSION, Decision given in the .case of John Brodie aqd 'Co.,'hotel-brokers, versus G; Hawkins,' hotelkoeper, a claim for ,£75, commission alleged to bo, due on the sale of a hotel. Mr. Young appeared for plaintiffs, and' Mr. .Treadwell: for dofendant. The magistrate' held : that tho; sale. had been brought about through the agency of one Tristam, and had not been effected : by. plaintiffs; Judgment wmild. therefore bo' for defendant, i\ith iCll 17s. costs. SALE;.OF FRUIT,. . . \/' In the caso of the. New, Zealand Fruit and Produce Company, Ltd. (Mr. Toogood). v.' David Elliott, fruiterer, of. Noivtown (Mr. .Inckson), n E claim for .£3 lis. ■fid", for :goods supplied, judgment was given for the defendant, .with JEI .15s. •costs. .... ' DEFAULT CASES. In the following cases, tho magistrate gavo judgment'for plaintiffs by. Hamilton Cuming v. Ernost Clark, for JBI its., -and- costs- ss.i samo v. , George. Whitinore, for £1 ss. 6(1,,.and costs 55.; Wellington Biscuit Co., Ltd.' v. James Smith'and-Son, for JS27 18s. 5d., and costs,C2 Ms.; Edward Russell M'Leftn Dymock, as roceiver for debenture holders of Poter Hudson- and Co., Ltd. v. James A. Smith, for J6U lis. lid.,. and costs ,£1 10s;. 6d. ; E: Reynolds • and Co., Ltd. v. Edwnrd Frisseli, for £3 Hs. Gd.v and costs ss;; ■ Ross-and Glendining, Ltd. v. Thomas Vernon, for X 35 ss. Id., and costs J!2 lis.; Doyle Bros.'v. C. Wilson and Mrs. Wilson,.for 4:10 135.-6(1., and costs 155.; Raphael, Tuck and. Sons, Ltd.. y. .'Albert T. Almond; for £4- 7s. 1d,,, and.i costs Bioliard Tieo Badhamj aa lia.uidator

of Yqrex, Barker, and l'inlay, in liqqida: t'on v. P. Williams, for <£1, and costs 55.; JI Parlnnd Bros. v. Daniel F. O'Sullivan, ™ r !® 14s- 9d., and costs lis.; Rosenberg and Co. v. Charles A. Pascoo, for J-l 145., and costs 5?.; Griffiths and Co., Ltd., v. Mrs. I,.'..Dnwsop, for ,£lO. 12s. 4(!., and costs -El 13s. od.; A. G, Healing and Co. v. Mrs. M. Wiggins, for- 19s. 9d., aud costs, 145,;. W. M'Gill and, Sons ,v. J. Kirkwood, for .£1 19s. 0d„ and posts 55.; Hprohl Smith, v. iildgar Ward, for ■£12 35., and costs ,£1 10s. 04- . ; JUDGMENT SUMMONSES. , In the judgment summons case,. tho Stewart Timber, Glass, and 'Hardware Company, Ltd., v. James . Smyth, tho'' debtor was ordered' to pay ,£s(j 13S; 5d., on or before March ■ 8,, in, default, 14. day?'lmprisonment in-.the \Vanganni Gaol. John James Ward was ordered to pay Samuol Smiley • Patterson and Son the sum of 17s.' lOd;, on. or :befbre March 8, i.. default 3,days' imprisonment;'. '

A TRANSACTION IN CORKS. , '- ' (Before Mr. Tv.. G. Riddell, S.M.) Judgment, was given in tho- case of Bernard Hajl, assighep" of ■Messrs. 11.- G. Anderson and Co., indent , agents; Wei-: linsfam,. vors'ns the Pannpyirko Cpfdial Factory (Edward P. Brogan and Wm. H.Dawson), a claim for ,£23 Is. lid., 111 re. spect to the sale of .corks, which had ..been, "refused by the company. -< ;• Mr. Toogood. appeared for plaintiff,-and Mr. Fhidlay' for tho defendant company. The. magistrate sp'd that it appeared from the. evidence that, about March 25, 1908, tho defendant company '• ordered from 1 . Anderson and Co. two . bales of corks. ,Th.e; consignment did not;.reach Danne'virke: nntil 17, 1909. VThe defendant: company refused 1 , to take delivery of the consignment, and- of another : 'consignwent of three bales corks which arrived on the samo date, and : whicliVwas ordered in August, 1908. . No.jtime /was mentioned for delivery, and in such a'caso tho seller was bound to .deliver, a reasonable time; - This, in 'the casbiof -thp 1 two bales' Jjrst ordered, had not been dpnp,' and tho defendant company' therefore oould refuse to take delivery. , Jn respect, of' the second cpngighment, an unreaiipnable time had not elapsed before delivery. In-respect of the first .consignment,-'thp' claim- for. damages'' must :ba In respect .'of the MS : 9s. 3d. (the; amount' remaining - after adding' storage; railige,' and cartage to tho invoice cost,, - and deducting the: price subsequently, re'alised'by. the salo of tho consignment)^this amount would be allowed, as damases, to. plaintiff, with 10s.' costs.' Socurity for. tho costs of an appeal was fixed at ten guineas,''

■ POLICE CASES. : THEFT OF POSTCARDS. A boy of eleven was brought un at,a' sitting of the Juvenile Court, .and charged with .tho: theft of. Is.-'worth of postcards from 1 the shop of Joseph Zachanah. He admitted that he had:gone into ,"Zak's|'^ ; and surreptitiously , placed half a dozen; cards • in. nis: pocket. .. Tho magistrate warned the boy against, a repetition of dishonesty, and discharged him. ', ,y.: INSOBRIETY.-, ; Ay&rst offender,. Martin Ford,' and Ernest, Mathews, : alias; . John . Mathews, were each: fined 10s. for drunkenness. '-.