DISTRICT COURT.—Wednesday. [Before his Honor Judge Beckham.]

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXIV, Issue 3432, 16 July 1868, Page 5

DISTRICT COURT.— Wednesday. [Before his Honor Judge Beckham.]

DUNOAH AND ANOTHER V. TODD. — JODGMBNr. In giving judgment in this oaae, the evidence in which had been taken on the previous day, his Honor said that, as it did not appear that the cheques were given for any specific purpose, but had been made to the general account, judgment must pass for defendant, OOOPKK Y. OOOPK. Claim, £38 13s, 4d,, for work and labour done, Mr. Hetsketh appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Whitaker for defendant. John Cooper deposed, that; he was a gardener, residing in Auokland. He entered defendant's service as gardener on the 31st October, 1807. It was agreed that he was to receive at the rate of £80 a year, with board and lodging ; a week's notice of disoharge to be given on either side. He continued in defendant's servioe until the 4th June, 1868. He resided in a tent until a few weeks previous to that time, when a whare was built, to whioh he removed. He received board until about nineteen weeks before he left, when he gave it up because he had not sufficient to eat. The defendant agreed to give him. 10s. a week in lieu of his board, but he did nob receive any money from him until ten weeks and three days, when he received £5. He presented the cheque at the bank, when it was dishonoured, and he had consequently to borrow money to support himself during that period. Witness gave the cheque to one of the men, from whom he received the money. He continued in defendant's service until the 4th June, and received another cheque, which was also dishonoured. He left Captain Coope because he could not get anything to eat. He gave defendant a week's notice on the Friday previous to the 4th June, and left him in four dajs, because he had nothing to eat. He saw defendant on the Thursday evening, who said that he might go if he liked. He asked for his wages about the time they were due, and defendant said he expected money from home, and would pay him whoa he received it. Crosi-ezamiaed by Mr. Whitaker : The engagement was made at defendant's house. He had never been absent except on plaintiffs business. He was in Auckland over a week on one occasion, and was taken up for drunkenness. Defendant promised to build a wooden whare for him before the expiration of a month, but did not do so until three weeks before he left. He had never told Captain Coope that he would not stay because he had had a quarrel with the maidservant. 'ihe cheque for £3 was afterwards paid. Defendant wanted him to stay for three years, which he agreed to do if he would raise his wages. Defendant never said he might get any provisions he required from his house. Thomas Allen stated that he was a farmer residing at Papakura Valley. His farm was adjoining Captain Coope's. He had seen plaintiff working as a gardener on defendant's ground. Plaintiff had given him a cheque for £3 to cash in Auckland, which was dishonoured. He had lent plaintiff money at various times, and it had not all been repaid. Cross-examined by Mr. Whitaker : I gave plaintiff the provisions, although the cheque had not been cashed. He-examined by Mr. Hesketh : I paid for the provisions but of my own pocket, to accommodate Cooper. This concluded the evidence for plaintiff. William Jesse Coops deposed that he was formerly a captain in the 17th Lancers. He had engaged plaintiff for twelve months at £80 a year, with board and lodgings, to make an orchard and kitchen garden. There was no agreement about the time the payments were to be made. About three months after he had been engaged plaintiff said the other servants had insulted him, and asked leave to go into town to look for another place. Witness then reminded him of his engagement for twelve months, and asked what he could do to make him. more comfortable, when he agreed to fulfil his contract if he would give him 10s. a week and build him a home, which he did. Plaintiff had always received a cheque for the amount owing for board when he asked for one. The cheques were dishonoured in consequence of a peculiar arrangement he had with his bankers, but they were afterwards paid. When plaintiff told him that the cheque had been dishonoured, he at once wrote a letter to his bankers and gave it to Cooper, who did not deliver it. On the 14th of June, plaintiff left his work, when he told him that he would forfeit all his wages if he left. Plaintiff had received £29, out of which he had spent £14 on defendant's account. Cross-examined : I have seen plaintiff doing work on Sun -toys, but never asked him to work on that day. Plaintiff only planted about half the orchard. Plaintiff was to work for twelve months without receiving any portion of his wages. The second cheque was dishonoured because a letter he had written had not reached the bank. He did not pay plaintiff the 10s. weekly, because he did not ask for it. He h&d told plaintiff that he might run up an account with Mr. Allen, and that he would pay for it. Provisions were kept for him every day at the house, but he never called for them. John Cornish stated that he was a ship carpenter, and was residing with Captain Coope. Plaintiff told him that be had agreed to stay with Captain Coope for twelve months. There was no lack of provisions supplied him. On the 4th of June he heard Captain Coope say to plaintiff that by leaving him then he was breaking his agreement. This concluded the evidence, and his Honor said that, as the week's notice which plaintiff had given was not sufficient to terminate the engagement, judgment must pass for defendant.

RUSSELL T. MABSH. Claim, £36 10s., balance of £57, amount of judg. ment obtained by the trustees in the eßtate of T. W. Marsh against Mr. James Russell, as haying been received by him from Mr, Marsh. Mr. Whitaker appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. Hesketh for defendant. After hearing the evidence, which was of an uninteresting nature, his Honor gave judgment for plaintiff, with £10 13s. costs. This concluded the business.