A MINING ACTION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXI, Issue 9581, 4 August 1894, Page 5

A MINING ACTION.

[by TELEGRAPH—OWN CORRESPONDENT.] Thames, Friday. As interesting case was brought before Mr. H. Eyre Kenny, Warden, at a sitting of the Warden's Court to-day, being an application made by A. W. Sawyer to enforce a lien upon the Ocean View Extended mine, at Matarangi, for wags?. Mr. . Clendon appeared for the plaintiffj and Mr. Miller for the mine owners. Mr. Clendon, in opening the case, said that this was an argument as to whether the plaintiff was entitled towages, he being at the lame time a partner and shareholder in the Matarangi claim. The plaintiff had a lien upon the ground, for wages due from 12th January to 23rd May, and the question was, could he maintain an action for wages when he himself was a shareholder. Mr. Clendon quoted several authorities upon the subject in favour of the lien. Mr. Sawyer, he submitted, was hired for wages, and the mine manager certified that the time was correct. Mr. Miller contended that in the first place the lien was bad in itself, inasmuch as there was no money due to JSawyer, as an assignment of this debt had been made to a person named Chin Sue, and a copy of this document was before His Worship. He maintained that only the person to whom the wages were actually due could brin" forward proceedings. A point was raised as to the actual number of the working days in the three months, there being only 91 in every three calendar months, and the lien was for 92 days, one day in excess. Then came the question can a shareholder be a wages man ? In reply he held that a man must be hired to be a wages man—if Sawyer was hired then he was both master and servant. He could not, however, be a servant of the others, independent of the partnership. Under section 187 of the Act three members of a partnership could only employ themselves to work for £2 8s per week, and bo cut out a mortgage given by themselves ; but he (Mr. Miller) contended that no law would support 'such a fraud as . that, and Mr. Sawyer entered into a covenant in a mortgage over the property, that he would not do anything which would be prejudicial to the license. Mr. .Miller said he thought the propor cour?e would be to dissolve the partnership. Mr. Clendon here said that if Sawyer had transferred his lien, it could not be lost till the wages were paid. The lien could not be parted with, although the i debt had, and the gold won by Sawyer had been invested in the partnership of the mine, not in Sawyer personally. His Worship said that he would take time to consider the case; and judgment would be reserved accordingly.