RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Grey River Argus, Volume XXIII, Issue 3487, 23 October 1879, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Tuesday, October 21. (Before C. Broad, Esq., R.M.) THE STILLWATER CONTRACT. Gill v. Rowe. — This was a claim to recover LI 3s, being amount due on a disputed wages' account. The sum of 9s 6i was paid into Court, Mr Guinness appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Perkins for the defendent. Robert Gill — Was plaintiff in the case. Was employed at the current rate of wagesi. Told Mr Oxford when he was paid his wages that he expected 103 per day, but he was paid 93 6d per day. Oxford said Rowe would be up on the Monday, but he came up on the Tuesday, and said ha would not give more than 9s per day. Br Mr Perkins— Oxford told him that he could not give more than 9s 6d per day. He left the day's pay in hand. Did not go and ask him for the day's pay. Mr Guinness said he would, if his Worship wished it, call the witnesses who ( were examined in Gibson's case as to the rate of wages. The Resident Magistrate did not think J it was necessary, as it would be merely a repetition. * Mr Perkins contended that there was * no caso, and asked that it might be dismissed. His Worship said this was a different case to that of Gibson's, a* plaintiff had objected to the rate of wages at the time

le was paid. Although he took the imount, it did not prove that he agreed yith the rate paid. The case had better jo on. Mr Perkins then callled — James Oxford — Was foreman for Mr Rowe, and in charge of tb.B Stillwater contract. Remembered putting Gill on, but did not remember whether anything was said about current rate of wages. He paid some 10s and others 9s per day, according to their skill. Gill said, when witness paid him, that the wages were small, but he did not object to it. He told Gill he would make anything right if it was wroug. He told Peterson and Barton about the wages. By Mr Guinness — Gill did not say that the money was less than the current wages. Witness told plaintiff that was all he could give him. He told' him that the wages was 93 6d. Gill did not raise any other objection, except saying that it was small. *■ By Mr Perkins— Did not tell Gill to see Mr Mr Rowe about the 10s wages. Otto Peterson — Had been at work on the railway works. Oxford said he could not tell him the rate of wages, but that there would be a difference. William Rowe — Was the contractbri^l^the railway. Had paid 93 per day wages between here and Saltwater. The current rate of wages on the Stillwater was from 93 to 103. Gill was credited with 93 6d. Wages were classified on the contract. Gill had never demanded any "money from him. By Mr Guinness — None of the men had gone on to work since the strike. Mr Perkins and Mr Guinness having addressed the Court, His Worship said it was to be regretted that there was no definite rate of wages fixed at the commencement of the work, bo that the men might know what they were going to work for. He differed from Mr Perkins, in considering this a test case. The current rate of wages had been admitted, and, as far as he could ascertain, was 103 per day. The difference between the present caee and Gibson's was, that Gibson had taken money without demur, whereas plaintiff did demur at the time he was paid. Plaintiff also endeavored to see defendant on the Tuwd ly, for Mr Rowe would have nothing to say to him. Judgment would be fur the amount claimed and costs.