A Peculiar Action

Southland Times, Issue 19482, 9 December 1904, Page 3

A Peculiar Action

J » ■ At Gore yesterday W. Stephenson (acting postmaster) sued E. K. Bowler for £1 Os Gd, on behalf of the Telegraph Department, as sender of a •■oliect telegrain which, <on presentation to tho person named therein, was refused. Mr T. M. Macdonald represented the Department. Mr Bowler applied to have Police Coinunissioner Dinnie joined as defendant, but this was refused. He then stated that the facts were that Mrs Scott made complaint to him that her misband hntl deserted her, that an order had been made at Greymouth compelling him to pay her £1 per week ; that she had no means of enforcing the order and that Scott was leaving Wellington that afternoon (Kith November) in company with another woman. Ho ,(Mr Howler)' salis^ fied himself that tho only procedure possible was an application for sureties under sec. 25 of the Destitute Persons Act, which could only be laid at Uieyinduth. Hie went to the Police and got on the [ telephone with 'Inspector Mitchell at lnvercargill, but the Inspector hud sent a constable- He (Mr Bowler) considered that the police ought to he ashamed of the way they lmd acted in Miis mnUcr. Inspector Mitchell refused t-1 «jlutrly to take i^ny steps, therefore !ie i'Mr Uowler) wrote the telegram, the .subject of this action, to Comimissioner Oinnie, at Wellington. The Commissioner refused to pay for the message, but acted upon ijt, because the necessary :>teps were taken at Greymouth to enforce the gicKt and Scott was arrested in Wellington the same afternoon, and lmd to find security. Mr Bowler BU'VaniUnd that as *he uoverament and "* not Mr Stevenson v. as the real plain tifT. it >vr.s the ;-> t o i »er jcrs-cn to pay for tho wireMr Macdonald contended ili.it these facts did not affect the case. Mr Cruickshank, S.M., said that as a matter of plain law, of course the plaintiff was entitled to succeed,., but there was a great deal in what Mr Bowler had said, and if any good had been done, or expense saved to the country by this telegram, he (the magistrate) would be quite justiGed in using his discretion under the good conscience and equity clause of the Act. After considerable argument his Worship said he Would give judgment for plaintiff in the meantime! with 28s costs, but after hearing another case to come before him, he would, if he thought proper, recommend the Government to refund the amount. The case referred to by his "Worship was Scott v. Scott, claim for maintenance. There was a charge of disobedience of an order for £1 per we<? k ; an application to have tho order altered, arid the third to have a fresh order made. His Worship made .an order that payment be .made in Goro of the amount in arrears and £1 Per week) from date. The charge of disobedience of the former was dismissed without prejudice.— Own correspondent. ___________