MAGISTR ATE’S COURT. (Before 11. Y. Widdowson, Esq., S.M.; Judgment by default was given for plaintiffs in the following actions:—W. S. P.cddcll and Co. v. Harold Banks, goods, £6 14s 6d, and costs (£1 5s 6d); Joseph 15. Snell v. Robert Gough, goods, £1 ss, and costs (6s) ; Louiea Pbilp v. John Barnes (of Fairfield), goods, 10s 4d, and costs (10s) ; John Swan and Co. v. George Herzog (of Auckland), goods, £3 ICte, and costs (10s) ; More ton and RradSeld v. H. G. Walmslcy (Palmerston North), on two postal notes and interest, £22 12s, and costs (£2 14s).
J, Deuffiruss v. Walter Clark.—Claim, £ll 17s 3d, on a judgment summons.— Defendant did not appear, and was ordered to pay the sum lorlhwith, and costs (15s), in default 12 days’ imprisonment. A. E. Usher wood and Co. (Mr Moore) v. Albert Edward Admoro (tn Foxton), painter.—Claim, £1 17s Oil, for putty, etc., supplied.—T’iie defendant’s evidence was taken in the northern court, and the defence was that the sum had been' paid, and nntiiing was owing by defendant.— After hearing evidence the Magistrate gave judgment for plaintiffs for the amount claimed, and coats (6s). Inspector of Awards (Mr Browett) v. J. G. Lanrenson (Mr Hanlon). —Claim, £lO, for an alleged breach of the Otago and Southland Bakers and Pastrycooks’ award, in that defendant, in the period from August 24 to October IV, employed John Boyer as a baker's laborer, at a wage of 20s per week, instead of 48s per week as required by the award.—The defence, as stated by" Mr Hanlon, was that under the award tho boy was not a baker’s laborer. A baker’s laborer must bo one who assisted and attended upon tho journeyman, because the word hiker's ’’ was inserted in every item dealing with laborers. All the work this boy had done could have been done outside the bakehouse, and was not in the way of assisting the baker to make bread. Tins boy coidd have been taken on as an apprentice at a lesser wa.ge, but he was employed at the wage dated to do rough work and run errands. a»d by his employment to do such work the apprentice was able to bo entirely concerned with the learning of his trade.—The Magistrate pointed out that in.another case where a youth was employed at work not provided for in an award* under the heading of apprentice of journeyman, tho Comt had held him to ba entitled to a journeyman’s wage.— Air Hanlon said that in this present case, where the boy knew nothing of the baking trade, and had nothing to do more than errands and work specially divided from talcing woik, it would bo absurd to class him as a journeyman. It was out of consideration for the apprentice that a boy was employed in this position, Mr Lanrenson contending that it would not bo fair to ask an apprentice to do this work, rime he would not bo ablo _ then to learn his trade. If the law was interpreted to mean that this boy was a baker’s laborer, then all Air Laurenson had to do was to take on another apprentice at 13s 6d (as he was entitled to do), and the apprentices would have to do this that be had four journeymen and an apworb.—Defendant, giving evidence, said prentice, and this hoy. He had never had a bailor’s laborer. —Cross-examined witness eaid that before employing this W he employed an older youth at 30s, but that, had been too much for the work, —Tho Magistrate reserved his decision.
Permanent link to this item
THE COURTS-TO-DAY, Evening Star, Issue 15664, 1 December 1914
THE COURTS-TO-DAY Evening Star, Issue 15664, 1 December 1914
Using This Item
Allied Press Ltd is the copyright owner for the Evening Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence. This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Allied Press Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.