MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Taranaki Daily News, 24 July 1929, Page 2

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

FOUR-YEAR-OLD CLAIM TO PAY. Unsatisfactory evidence was submitted by both sides in the opinion of Mr. IL W. Tate, S.M., at the Inglewood Court yesterday, when Sydney Chard claimed £l5 from William I. Thomason as the balance of wages allegedly due to him on a contract for delivering stone from a river in 1925. After hearing contradictory evidence from both parties the magistrate non-suited the plaintiff. He had had a contract with Thomason to take as many boulders as possible and deliver them to the crusher at 4s a yard, said “Chard. He had delivered 70 yards when he was informed that he might have some difficulty in obtaining his money from Thomason, so he left work on the contract. He had em-_ ployed his two brothers at £1 a day each and his father and a team of horses at £2 10s a day. Cross-examined by Mr. W. H. Armstrong, Chard said the contract was definitely with himself and not with his father. He denied that the contract was to pull 1500 yards and that lie left because he obtained a contract at another place. He heard about the other contract before he left Thomason, but t)iat was not his reason for. leaving. , The magistrate expressed surprise that plaintiff did not prosecute for four years if the reason he had left was because he thought he would not be paid, but Chard gave no explanation. For Thomason Mr. Armstrong denied that there was ever any contract with Sydney Chard, but said there was one between Thomason and Chard’s father to pull 1500 yards of metal at 3s 6d a yard. He contended that Chard found a better job and left Thomason “in the lurch.”

Thomason said he agreed to pay Chard, senior, for 75 per cent, of the crushed metal every fortnight, but the day for the first fortnightly pay had not arrived when the Chards ceas’eiT work. They worked four days out of 11 and crushed 60 yards. He had seen the father since and told him he would pay him nothing. He had twice received letters from different solicitors who had refused to go any further when he explained. To Mr. I. P. Grant Thomason admitted he had been defendant the last court day in a claim by an employee for wages. He had had half-a-dozen similar cases in the past few years.

In an undefended civil case for debt judgment was given by default for Hinge Bros, against H. Gray for £6 Is 2d (costs £1 12s 6d). On a judgment summons A. J. Mischefski was ordered to pay Sutherland Bros. £l3 15s 2d (costs £1 Is) forthwith, in default ten days’ imprisonment the warrant to be suspended so long defendant pays £1 a week. For stacking firewood on the side of Bedford Road contrary to the by-laws of tho Inglewood County Council Albert E. Dombroski was fined 20s with 12s costs. For similar offences on Norfolk Road James A. Officer was fined 10s (costs £1 2s 6d), and Fred Gooch was ordered to pav costs amounting to £1 2s 6d.

William I. Thomason, who admitted driving a motor lorry on the Mountain Road without having a heavy traffic license, was fined £1 with costs £1 2s 6d.

Charged with a similar offence on Durham Road, Norman P. Curd denied he had ever been on the road in question. The case was adjourned to allow the county inspector (Mr. G. Barrack), who said he had not seen Curd on. the road but only noted his wheel marks, to submit more conclusive evidence.