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

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

["Before A. Turnbull Esq., R.M.] Win. Satchell v. Geo. Canton. — Claim for £6 for medical attendance and medicines. Mr Pitb who appeared for the plaintiff said that defendant had paid £1, and ho asked for judgment for £5. Judgment was given for amount claimed and costs 29s Gd. Same v. John Driscoll.— Claim for £3 10a 6d for medical attendance and medicines. Judgment for amount claimed and costs •17s Gd. Mr Pitt appep.red for the plaintiff. Bond Finney and Co. v. Kothwell Bros,— Claim for £1 7s for subscription to Colonist. Judgment for amount claimed and costs 18s 6d. Batt v. Brooks. — Claim for £44 16a for work done. Mr Fell, who appeared for the plaintiff, called George Batt, who said : Defendant took a contract to construct a bridge at the Hope and I became ono of his sureties. He also asked mo to go into partnership, but we did not, but wo arranged that I should work on wage 3. I was to work with my bullocks at 12s a day, and without my bullocks at 7s. I took eight bullocks with mo. 1 employed in the work from September 26th to November 25th ; then we knocked off. The Government stopped the work, as the piles would not drive. I had no idea howlong' we had been stopped. I did not go home, as I expected to go on with the work. Brooks told me nothing. The Christmas' holidays came, and on the 23rd January the Inspector told me to start. I worked on then till the 9th April, and then the contract was finished. I have had no money from Brooks. I asked him once and he said he had no money. On the Bth of April I Wrote him a letter stating that I would take £30, as I know the work had not been remunerative. 1 sent him. the account with the letteii I saw Brooks about a week after and he said he could not read or write, and he made out that he did not know what the amount of my

olaim was. I told him what I would take. He said then we were partners. I said 'No suoh thing.' I told him we had agreed for 12s a day for bullocks and my work, nnd 7s for my work only. He said there was no agreement. He told me I had not worked well, but he had never complained to me before. When we started, my bullocks were the only ones on the job.' Brooks then brought 6 bullocks down, bub they were in very poor condition and couldn 't work. I have allowed him 20 weoks ab 14s a week for food. I was never paid any wages by Edwards (hotelkeeper), but I worked for him in the interval when we were knocked off the bridge. The ordinary tucker allowance in camp ia 108 and at the hotel £1. He (Brooks) now owes me .€44 10s. Cross examined by Mr Pitt : It was never agreed b.tween. Brooks and me that we were to be partners, I know a man oalled James. He did not undertake to cart the timber. There was 15,000 feet of timber to oart. I kept the time I was working with the bullooks. I consider that when I am looking for bullooks I am at work. The work was stopped because there was a mistake in the plans of the bridge. I could not be a partner, because I was a surety. Re examined : I had nothing to do with the business of the bridge. Brooks never consulted me. Jamea Thomas : I knew that defendant had got the contract, and I was one of his Eureti'.'H. Brooks thought that £50 was to be made out of the job, and it was agreed that Batt was to ba a partner. A day or two afterwards Brooks oarne in and said Mr Baigent objected to any partnership, and if there was one he would not supply the timber. Brooks then a aid Batt should have full work with his bullocks on the oontraot from first; to last. Brooks' bullocks were in very poor condition. Batfc's bullooks were ia good oondition. Gross examined : Mr Batt wanted his cattlo on tha way to the West Coast. They were in good oondition. Re-examined : Brooks said Batt was one of the best men he had on the job. This was the plaintiff's case. Mr Pitt for the defence, called William Brooks, who said: I am the contractor for the Hope Bridge. I told Batt he could be I either a partner or a day man. He said he would think about it, but he gave no decisided I answer. Batt took up 6 or 8 bullooks. I had 7 bullocks, I took ac much with mine as he did with his. Batt was sometimes half the day finding his bullocks. I paid 18s a week for his board at the hotel. I charged the other men 14s a week for tucker in camp. When the work was stopped I told him he had better go home, as the work might be stopped for a month or two. He never asked me for money all the time he was working. I never saw a time book. Batt's time was never kept. Cross-examined : I never grumbled at Batt for not working. It is not true what Mr Thomas says that my bullooks were in poor oondition. Edwards told me he had charged Is a week for Batt's bullooke all the time he was there. — Dixon : lam a contractor. Batb was working at ibe bridge. I d'd nob kaep his time. Bat; worked well. Ho was uway at odd limes looking after his bullooks. I tbiiik 3s a hundred wr-s enough to draw the timber to Ihe bridgo. This otosod the case for tfoe defeooe, and His Worship gave judgment for £35 16s, ar.d o .an £4 10s lOd.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NEM18900429.2.9

Bibliographic details

Nelson Evening Mail, Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XXIV, Issue 100, 29 April 1890

Word Count
996

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT. Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XXIV, Issue 100, 29 April 1890

Working