DEFENDED CASES.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2008, 11 June 1875, Page 2

DEFENDED CASES.

EEED V. HOLDSHIP.

Tliis was a claim of £4 for work and labor. ' : ' • ; Mr Macdonald for plaintiff: Mr Tyler for defendant. Joseph Eecd deposed—He was a carpenter by trade. Knew.Mr Davidson, who had charge of Holdship's timber yard. "Witness had been employed rafting timber for Mr"Holdship—about 20 months; also being employed about the yard. He had from time to time sent in his charges.. He was employed, by, Mr Davidson at rafting' at 6d' per hundred feet, and when he could not go rafting ho was to bo employed about the mill. He had been paid from timo to time, untilthe end of last year, when Mr Davidson told witness to let it stand over till next month. . The number of days charged for was eight, at the rate of eight shillings per day. He had been paid for the raft- - ing. What,he claimed was for work at the mill. Davidson went away in January. Witness ' saw Mr Holdship once' 1 since. He paid witness for the rafting, and on his speaking about the other work, heiold witness to send in his bill, and he. would pay it." He afterwards refused to pay it .when the,.bill was sent in. Witness told him' he would summons him, apd Mr Holdship told him he had a cross account. Witness had been using some gear which Davidson had-told him to stick to 'until he was paid. He had never been asked for,the gear. . , ~ * •," ■'•" Cross-examinedi.by Mr Tyler"—'Mr Holdship, paid me a sum ;of money in January. " I did no work after that. I swear I claimed_wages for labor at the time. I left the account with tho -Glerk when.Mr Holdship was in Auckland. That is my account; (Account put in. Mr Tyler also put in a receipt in full. signed by witness.) I did not notice that I was signing a receipt in full, otherwise I should not have signed it. I swear the clerk did not put his name to the receipt in my presence. I swear I claimed wages for labor at the time., : His Worship 1 said if the receipt'produced by Mr Tyler was'set up as a dis- , charge in full, it would require to be. stamped.

stamped. Examination continued —The boat and gear are now-at Holdship's (Thompson's) yard. I brought them there on Tuesday last. Mr Holdship asked me.for them, but Mr Tompson had told me to retain possession, as they were his, and I did.so. George Holdship deposed — That he had been formerly pi'opriotor of the Saw Mill. ; For some reason Mr Davidson (hisJinanager) left:- Saw-plaiFitifluin the_ office when he (witness) was down settling "up the afFair3.-. Asked plaintiff" for his account, but. he said it was in the books.' The account was made out £1 15s and plaintiff said it was right. There wasan account against Joseph Reed in thebooks, .but, ILeed said that was not his, and he was paid the £1 15s.'' Plaintiff' said nothing about an extra charge in witness' hearing. About" a week after' witness received Beed's account, and refused to pay it.' - J Cross-examined "by Mr Macdonald— The signature of Mr Morpeth, clork, was appended to the receipt after I received the summons. Morpeth wrote the body of the receipt. I don't know that it-was to patch up the case. I sent that letter that; I. wajn " determined to defend the action at any fiqst." ,\. Mr Tyler addressed - the Court, and dwelt on plaintiff's giving a receipt in full when he went there for the ostensible ..purpose ,of having a settling up. He contended that plaintiff had' not given a satisfactory explanation of Jiow' he came to sign the receipt. . ■ . y Mr Macdonald replied at some length to show that a verdict should be given for what was asked. ' ' ■ : The Plaintiff was nonsuited—costs, £3 Is. • ' ■ ' ■

MITCHELL V. GEUNDY.

This was a claim of 12s 6d for rates.

Mr Mitchell stated that defendant had offered to compromise the matter by paying part of the amount, but he (Mr Mitchell) had no authority to accept partial payment. He tiiereforo asked for a remand that some arrangement might be come to.'- -

Remanded to .the 25th instant. JAMES EAE V. EGBERT BWANSON

This was a claim, of £5 12s, the amount of a promissory note given byßobertshaw, which Swaison had endorsed.

;The.plaintiff accepted:a nonsuit ;on it being pointed ,put.that.the ; document was informal. .:','.'. ' \

This was all . .the,-j business, and the Court then ad}6ui|»ed.; I , V-^^ '. ",o