A COUNTER-CLAIM.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 298, 26 January 1910, Page 2

A COUNTER-CLAIM.

-MORE FIREWORKS. Tlic counter-claim was heard in the afternoon, when Hill was sued for £llO 10s (kl foi; grazing five cows and throe horses on the property, rent of the cottage property in which Hill resided and still continued to reside, for damage done to the cottage (broken windows, etc.), for the value of property alleged to have been converted by Hill to his own use, and £SO dunnages duo to the alleged negligent manner in which Ilill carried out his duties as caretaker.

Patrfck Raill deposed that the plaintiff grazed stock on the property from •June to October. Ilill also took possession of three cows left by Patterson on the property. One he subsequently sold at Webster Bros.' sale, one was at Rowcli's, and one Ilill still retained. The three were worth £ls. When witness took over charge from Hill, the latter said "there's a timber-jack missing, but the D.O.A. knows all about it. I think Wilson Johnson took it over to your place. Witness replied that that was not so, and Hill answered that young Cray had seen the man take it. He did not say he had reported to the D.O.A. that Raill had taken it. Hill handed over two jacks, and witness' son already had one. Later he, brought another, an old one belonging to Lyall. Witness further deposed that Hill took corrugated iron from the old planer shop, and used it in building his cowshed. He saw this himself. He h'.ul no idea of how much there was, run reckoned it worth £3.

The Magistrate doubted the value cf this testimony. Witness continued that Hi 1 ! handed him over no liand-saws upon relinquishing his charge. There were cross-cuts and tailing saws belonging to the mill, and witness had seen them on the property both before the bankruptcy and during Hill's term. He had seen the damaged windows in the cottages, frames and glass broken, and fastenings removed. He knew that when Hill took charge of the nronerty the milling plant was all in splendid order, as were the buildings. When he (Raill) took over from Hill "they were anyhow. The saws were all rust. As for the engine, I have no knowledge of that, but it looked neglected." lie couldn't say the place was in working order when lie took it over. He remembered Hill's attention being called to trees lying across the tram-line.

To Mr. Johnstone: He couldn't say that the stock grazing on the property belonged to Hill. He had the use of them, though. He didn't know how long the stock was there. He didn't know how many head of stock were there, either. He never counted iiieu;. It wasn't his business. He couldn't say whether the cottages occupied by Hiil were lined or papered, but they were well worth five shillings each weekly. He couldn't say whether his own calves were occupying the cottages or whares now. They might be. He knew quite well that the cattle complained of belonged to the estate. He was not prepared to deny that Hill bought the cows.

Mr. Johnstone: And yet you say that he converted them to his own use. in short, you say he stole them. After further passages between coun el and witness, Mr. Johnstone "took off the gloves," and said he wasn't going to stand all this shuffling, but would insist on prompt and straightforward answers.

"But. mv dear sir," commenced the witness

"Don't 'dear sir' me. I won't have it. Address me respectfully. Tell me, now, do you know anything about these cows or not? Do you know they were Patterson's?"—No. You don't know? Well, how on earth do you say Hill converted them to "a ! s own use? You know nothing about it. Yours is most extraordinary evidence. You'll swear to anything. The Magistrate enjoined the witness to be careful.

Mr. Weston objected to Mr. Johnstone treating Raill as though he were the plaintiff.

Tim said he took'it. as Mr. Johnstone seemed to do also, that ail the information possessed by the D.O.A. came from Raill, for he couldn't get it elsewhere. He must have "put the D.O.A. up" to this. Somebody must havc informed Mr. Gurr of these matand as the witness was giving this evidence lie must infer that the information came from him.

Mr. Weston reminded the Court that Mr. Drummond, appointed by the creditors, had been over the property.

The Bench: What would Mr. Drum mond know about these cows?

Asked if he knew what was wrong with the mare "Jes/' mentioned in the counter-claim, witness said that he did not know she had ever been injured. His statement of her value, £3, was a mere guess. Mr. Johnstone: Now. aboni this timber jack, claimed for at £7, did you ever fafcp it away?— No.

In further examination, witness said he' had never examined the jack, and his value oj £-y was a mere guess. " He did not know when the windows of the cottage were broken, a.nd his estimate that it would take £4 to repair these windows was an opinion." His Worship: Oh, his estimate of the value of all these articles is quite valueJess.

Witness (to Mr. Johnstone): He had done nothing to the mill since he took charge. l>ut just "let it go." Some of the old iron from the mill destroyed by fire two or three years ago had been put on the present mill, and it had rusted through. He had not been ov n r the whole of the tramway.

Counsel: Do you know that fire chains of the tramway have been removed from there?

Witness (laughing): Well. I heard it last night for the first time.

Mr. Johnstone: You're a fine sort of caretaker, aren't you?

Witness laughed again, and Mr. Johnstone remalccd :"You seem to take it as a humorous sort of a job.'' Witness: Would 3-011 expect me, for (lie simple slim T get for it, to go looking over the tramway? (To the Magistrate): T would not devote the -whole of my time to it for £G a week. John Stewart, who described himself as a ''saw doctor," now working at Mokau, said lie had been in the sawmilling business for about 14 years. He worked for Patterson, just before the bankruptcy. for fourteen months. Patterson owned three cows and a mare called "Jes." The claim of £5 each was a .fail' 011 c for the cows. Thev would re cheap at Co. Hil'l had told witness that hj,. got. the animals, just after the mill stopped, for wages due to them, receiving them from E. 0. Patterson. Witness considered this rather peculiar, because he did not know such an amount of money was due to Hill. Ho had never known that any trouble had ever arisen with Mr. Ede, the company's

manager, about payment of wages. (Tile Magistrate: lou don't know .ur. Ede as i do. The Court records' don't support your statement). When in cmuge of me mill flnl should have taken all the belts oil' me machinery and put tliem away, in witness'' opinion £;>U was not too much to claim lor the depreciation ot the mill uue to th e manner in which Ilill carried out his duties. Witness said that the tramways were generally looked after by the men in the mill, but the Magistrate, in a sharp cross-examination, showed mat h e knew better. The witness was triable to say which of the men would have this duty; perhaps the bcuchnian, and perhaps tile engine-driver. A little later Mr. Fitzlierbert remarked: "I wish this witness would stick to facts, and not make such foolish statements." Cross-examined by Mr. Johnstone, witness submitted that Hiil bought two cows and a heifer at a sale oi goods from the farm then held by directi'm oi R. G. Patterson, who was J. J. Patterson's secretary sind representative. The pi'uit I*ll the mill was in very bad order.

Mr. Fitzherbert: When did you see it?

Witness: About, the end of Oetobor or November.

Mr. Johnstone: Oh! That was in Raill's tim«.

Further cross-examined: H e was a creditor in thp estate, and an undischarged bankrupt. Wilson Johnson gave evidence in support of the claim.

This closed the case in support cf th t . counter-claim. E. Snowball, manager of the New Plymouth Sasli and Door Co., an engineer with a first-class certificate, said he had inspected the Koru property a few davs ago. The roof was in bad order, more like fine-moshed wire-netting than galvanised iron. It would not keep out' rain. The state of the mill was due to natural decay. A broken beam in the building had been propped up. It was of pukatoa. The engine was in vevy good condition, very slightly rustei, but nothing to hurt if it were attended to. It had evidently been well eared 1 , for until recently. The saws were rust-i ed, but only slightly, and not pitted. The belts were in fair order, and still ■ on tile pulleys. As the mill had been closed down "for about 17 months, le would say it had been very well looked after. The cottages were the ordinary bush mill whares, in fair order. A mill manager did not usually pay rent. The tramway was getting rotten, but had evidently been a good one. A tramway decayed more quickly when unused than when in use. and it would be waste of time to do any work on it when the mill was not working.

Cross-examined: He had noticed the cottage windows broken, as usual where there wer e empty houses, a small boy, and stones. It would cost about £2 10s io replace the windows, inclusive of everything. Had he been caretaker, be wouldn't hav e put the belts away, for the mill was for sale, and prospective buyers' visits frequent. They, of course, would like to see the belts on. The emgina had apparently been kept well oiled, but not lately. If the engine had not, been looked after, as statedi. it would have been in a very bad state by now, and it would be if not looked to soon. The saws had evidently been looked after, too. He had put itien in charge of closed mills, and had never expected the caretaker to look after the tramways. Re-examined: The mill could be restarted in a few hours. Thomas V. Simons, sawmiller at Ta-ri-ki and the Carrington road, said he had visited the property two or three months ago to see the log-hauler, which had been portected. He went through the mill. He noticed that the engine was in excellent order, especially considering the state of the roof. The bright parts had been kept greased, and so had the saws, which were only slightly rusted. 'iiie mill building itseif was very bad, the iron roof being like a sieve. He reckoned the mill plant pTacTieaTTy in working; order, and that good care had been taken of it.

George Hill, the defendant in the counter-claim, said he had owned only one horse. It was not running on the had been protected. He went through cattle on the mill farm, although once or twice his cows had come on to the place from his wife's farm, adjoining-. The place was lying idle. As "bush ■boes;' he had occupied one of the mill cottages, and h e continued to occupy it after the bankruptcy. He had never heard of rent being charged until he received tile counter-claim. He mov?d from one cottage to another at the suggestion of ilr. Gurr, the D.O.A. at Dannevirke. because that occupied by him had had th e windows blown in. He was instructed to claim 3s a week from Sutton for the use of one of the cottages. There had never been any deductions from his wages by th e D.O.A. The cows alleged to have been "converted" 1;y him had been bought by him from 11. G. Patterson before the bankruptcy. The old mare -less was given to him by E. G. Patterson, as she wasn't fit to be taken away with the rest, ilis wife took her to Bishop's- place, and she was subsequently sold for £4 to Bishop. He

Tiad written to the D.O.A. complaining that the fences were being continuously broken, lie didn't know who broke them, but he noticed that it was airways Eaiil's cattle that he had to put out. The iivp jacks included one removed by witness from Lyall's farm upon Glut's instructions. "AN ABSOLUTE TRY-ON." Mr. Fitzlierbert said he understood the whole thing. The case was a tryon. A lot of wretched little claims were brought against this man because he claims his wages. I suppose Kail] brought about all this trouble. It looks like it. Such a lot of trivial matters that I wonder the D.O.A. ever had anything to do with it. These men, Eaill and Stewart, say the plant was neglected. but experts say it was in excellent' order. I ill'. Weston said the action was brought by the D.0.A., upon the instructions of his supervisors. The Magistrate: Well, 1. can't say' much for the supervisors' sense of honesty. All these wretched little clanus again a man; five shillings a week for using a wretched little bu-di.j whare. . . . The claims are too ridi- j culous. . . . There is no evidence to support them. ... I must non-su't. I consider the case an absolute try-on to get out of paying this man's legitimate claim. It's all been brought about by CTrTs man "Raill, who got Hill's billot.

Mr. Weston proceeded to cross-ex-amine Hill, and suggested that Hill, instead of letting the grazing as instructed', had "'kept it snug for liimsclf and Rowell."

Witness: And my wife had 50 acres ■vvitly only two cows on it! TTill denied that lie iiad taken a jack and substituted one of Lyall's. Mr. Weston: You heard what Eaill said?— Yes.

Mr. Fitzherbert: Do you wish to eug

gest that you bi'lieve. Mr. We-'.nn. that all that Ma ill said in the box was the truth?—because i don't.

Judgment was given for olaintili for £5." and costs £3 13s on his claim, and phintiff was non-suited on the counterclaim. Costs on the counter-claim amounted to £5, exclusive of witnesses' fees.