MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 13784, 9 September 1915, Page 6

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

The hearing of the case of .Frederick T. 'Lancaatcr. (Mr Buriiard) v. toward Oalcs (Mr Dawqon) and Gerald Tate, Bartlett was continued at the Magistrate's Court this afternoon 1 beforo Mr W, A. Barton, S.M. Fui'thei* -.evidence was given by George iSrrfith, builder, who considered the concrete yard a very good job. , Cliarles Martin Taylor, builder, gave similar evidence.

Frederick Thomas Lancaster deposed that he entered into a contract with Bartlett to put down certain work at a cost .of £45, together with a subsequent e_ctra authorised by Mr Oaks' manager, £l 12s 6d. The first objection to the work ho heard was through his solicitor two months after completion. Previously Oaks had expressed satisfaction with the work, and twice referred him to Bartlett for payment. He said that if he had not just purchased three Ford cars he would have paid him £20 himself. After seeing both parties later Oaks informed him he had a letter from Bartlett, instructing him to pay £20, but he found the amount was already "earmarked." A subsequent interview witli Bartlett ensued, when Oaks said the £20 wf.ii Id. be available .on the Monday, but on the date there was no money for him. Ho informed Oaks of his intention to put it into his solicitor's hands, and Oaks concurred, saying he would render" every assistance. — lo Mr Dawson.: Oaks never told him that Bartlett was working out a contra account aud taking a car. He never said lie accepted no responsibility. Mr Dawson, for the defence, said the position they took up was that Oaks had no ready cash to spend on his premises. Bartlett was indebted to him. and an ..rrangtinent was .come to work off. the i-ontra-account. * Thero was a definite understanding that the car was to be part payment for the work done. When Bartlett was unable to finance, to work oui the ci.iv, he suggested another arrangement. Oaks said lift was prepared I. ham. over tho car provided another £.5 worth of work was done, to whicii Bartlett agreed, yOn payment of the balance due tho <ar would be handed over. Oaks in-ornr-fed 1 Lancaster that- he accepted no responsibility for this work, but it wa. to come out of other moneys reaching him from Bartlett.

I Edward Oaks gave evidence to orginally obtaining a price from Bartlett for 1 alterations to his house (costing .3105). Bartlett was then owing him £65 for commission Bartlett- agreed but never made a start. In November la-st 'io suggested, that Bartlett should carry out alterations to the garage iv exchange for a. second-hand car. Bartlett agreed. (Case proceeding.)