TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

Evening Post, Volume LXVIII, Issue 79, 30 September 1904, Page 6

TO-DAY'S PROCEEDINGS.

When the Court resumed this morning, applications in ' compensation cases, and compensation claims, wero hoard. v William M'Crossman (claimant) v. John Barton (respondent), application by respondent to review tno weekly paymonts which tho Court, in September of lust year, ordorod him to pay to claimant on account of claimant's foot boittg crushed by a fall of gravel wlrilo ho was in respondent's employ. 'Mr. Myers appeared in support of rorndont s application to review. Mr. Findtay appeared for claimant. Tho medical ovidenco was generally to tho effect that claimant can do light work, and can also do heavy work' with a certain amount of pain and inconvenience, which may disappear with use. It ia possiblo that an operation may rtfmovo the pain, and respondent offers to Say tho cost of an operation up to £10. Respondent acked for review or comploto cancellation of tho present payment, £1 4s a week. The Court reserved judgment. E. G. Collier, claimant, v. Ernest Hopkins, respondent. Claimant, a labourer, of Levin, claimed for an accident caused by a log rolling on him whilo he wan in the employ of repyondent, who is a sawmiller of *Otaki. Respondent consented to a payment of half wages, £l4»a week. , 'ihe case came before the Court for a settlement as to which party «hould .pay, certain coeta in connection with filing the claim. Respondent argued that in view of his acknowledgment, and payment of certain amount*, the filing was unneccaenrv, that instead of ' being mulcted in coMs, respondent should get costs for 'being unnecessarily broughr. to Court. Tho Court held thnt apparently tltero wae a necessity for the filing of tho claim. Payments made prior to the filing of the claim were not conclusive evidence of full acknowledgment of liability. Claimant Mas awarded £2 2s costs, with disbursement*. Mr. Dunne was for claimant, Mr. Treadwell for respondent. . . (Left sitting). . ,;