MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 143648, 16 November 1911, Page 6

MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

A COMPLICATED CASE

In the Magistrate’s Court on ‘VVodnesciay, before Mr. H. S. Fitzherbert, S.M., vVilliam Twoedale, a bottle merchant, sued Mrs. 11. Brown lor 34 weeks board and lodging, alleged to have been owing since the sitting of the Native Land Court in New Plymouth, two and a halt years ago. Mr. C. ii. Weston appeared for plaintiff, and Mr. A. 11, Johnstone, instructed by Mr. A. li. Bunny, of Mastcrton, for defendant. Mrs. tanner, a friend of Mrs. Tweedale, gave evidence that -Mrs. Brown (then Miss Guard) came to her and asked her to recommend her some lodgings, and that sho had taken her to Mrs. Tweedale, the arrangement being that if Miss Guard was successful in her suit in the Laud Court she would pay, for the lodging, and in the main time sho was to work lor Mrs. Twoedale. She hud offered to do this herself. Mrs. Tweodale said that she could not remember whether anything was said about payments when Mrs. Tanner came to see her with Miss Guard, but sho constantly said she would pay her handsomely if successful in her case. She had paid her -15 s. She liked Miss Guard, and had corresponded with her after she left. Mr. Tweodale said he had not sent in his bill for board for over two years, because ho wauted to give Miss Guard grace. He had written to her several times since ho sent in the account, but she had ignored hie letters. He had demanded payment at 10s per week, as was agreed upon. Mr. Johnstone here pointed out that both Mr. and Mrs. Tweedale had already said that no fixed sum had been arranged. i Twoedale had at first claimed £3O, then had amended tho amount to £23, and subsequently to £l9, and also altered dates of claim; he had kept no record, and was relying .on Mr. Jackson's diary for the dates. Mrs. Brown said that she had done general work in tho house, and had also served in the shop. Her relations with the Twoedalos were quite cordial up to the time of her departure, and no claim had been made for any money for over two years. Sho had at first arranged to pay Mrs. Tweedale 8s per week, but this had afterwards been altered. The magistrate pointed out that both Mas. Tanner and Mrs. Twoedale had gfven evidence that no agreement was made for payment; they all disagreed on this point. Ho had never had a case before him with such contradictory evidence. . In summing up, the magistrate said that ho could only go by the facts; it was a very peculiar case. He would allow the 'claim of 10s per week for 34 weeks. It was only proper and just that defendant should pay something for her board and lodging, and the sum claimed was not unreasonable. Looking at the other side, Mrs. Brown had done work about tho house; all witnesses agaecd on that point, so she should be paid for this, and he assessed Mrs. Brown’s services at 5s per week. From this must bo reduced 27s 6d, already paid Mrs. Tweedale. This amount was arrived at by splitting the difference between what Mrs. Brown claimed to have paid and what Mrs. Tweedale said she had. This left £7 2s 6d, for which judgment was given, with costs 14s, solicitors’ fees 265, and witness foes 12s.