Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Action for Wages.

At the R.M. Court this afternoon the case of Finnister v. J. G. Kinross came on for heating. Mr Cresswell appeared for tho plaintiff, and Mr Lasoelles for defendant. This was a claim for £19 14s, as a month's wages, to which plaintiff alleged he was entitled to after his dismissal.

Tho plaintiff, examined, deposed ho was an engineer, and had always carried out his work to Mr Kinross' 8 satisfaction. Tho only reason which he had heard for his dismissal was because ho and Captain Creagh could not agree, and that either ono of them must go. The captain being an old servant he was retained by Mr Kinross, and ho (plaintiff) was discharged. B. B. Creagh, deposed he was master mariner in charge of the s.s. Ahuriri. Plaintiff had chargo of the engine room. His conduct had been very indifferent. One morning ordered steam to bo got up at one o'clock, and steam was not got up till half an hour afterwards. Plaintiff when asked why he had not got up steam when ordered, replied in a most insolent manner. Plaintiff ordered stores, and had no right to.do so. Declined to sign tho receipts for some because he knew nothing at all about them ; was not aware tho stores were on the ship.

J. G. Kinross deposed ho told Finnister that any goods ordered must go through tho captain. Finnister demurred, and spoko very disparagingly of tho captain. When ho dismissed the engineer told him ho could stay on till the end of the month. Plaintiff refused to work till the ond of the month, and paid him up to the day he had worked. Counsel having addressed tho Court, the R.M. said the Court was of opinion that the defendant was fully justified in discharging tho engineer without any notico whatever. There must bo no divided authority; the plaintiff was insubordinate, and should have obeyed the orders of bis captain. Defendant had paid into Court £9, wages due up to date of dismissal. Judgment was given for the amount paid into Court, with costs to defendant, witnesses' expenses £1 15s, and solicitor's fee £1 Is.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DTN18880424.2.44

Bibliographic details

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 5202, 24 April 1888, Page 3

Word Count
361

Action for Wages. Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 5202, 24 April 1888, Page 3

Action for Wages. Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 5202, 24 April 1888, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert