Bright Smile G.M. Co.

Thames Star, Volume XXIII, Issue 6788, 23 January 1891, Page 2

Bright Smile G.M. Co.

CLAIM FOR WAGES.

AN INTERESTING CASE.

In the course of the proceedings of the Resident Magistrates Court to-day a oaae in which considerable interest was centred waa heard, bsing that of H J. Syms v. Tho.v H. Crawford, claim £31 for work done. Me Kentiok appeared for plaintiff, and Mr Miller for defendant.

Mr Kenrick idd that Mr Miller did not dispute the amount, but the liability of defendant to pay it. The plaintiff was called, and stated that the claim waa for 22ft of driving in the Bright

Smile G.M. Oo.'s mine. Ho wea employed by the defendant to da the work, and looked to lim for payment. It was defendant who let him the contract ami returned him the deposit—he had not dealt with anyyne elee in the matter. It was agreed tbat the price was to be 17s 6d per foot.—Cross-examined by Mr Miller: He tendered for the driving. Before doing so, ho hod a specification to inspect. It was the same specification that had been previously used, and similar to the one now produced. It was headed "Bright Smile G.M.Co., No-Liability," and set forth that the work was to be done in the company's property. Timber and tools were to be found by the company, according to the specification. The tender was aocepted on the sth of November. The specification was net signed. His tender was addressed to "The manager of the Bright Smile G.M.Co." He did not know whether defendant had any interest in the ground, although his name"was to tho advertisement in the papers for tenders. He had jeat in an aooount for tho amount to defendant;, on bohalf of the company. Looked to defendant for payment of iho momy. Hia Worthip remarked that tho men certainly had a right to be paid. Mr Miller admitted this, but said that Mr Grawf&rd had not been paid himself. His Worship: But Mr Crawford is interested. Mr Miller said that Mr Crawford did not dispute the amount, and had done all in his i power to get tho men • their money. He did not defend the company in any way, and merely disputed his pliability to pay for work done on the company's behalf. His Worship: It is very hard indeed on the men to lose their 'money after working for it. If I was a manager, and it was doubtful whether the money would be forthcoming, I would tell them so.

Mr Miller replied that Mr Crawford always believed, and still did, that the men would be paid, Plaintiff's case having closed, Mr Miller called

Thomßs H. Crawford, who stated that he had no interest whatever in the Bright Smile G.M. Co.'s ground, which, however, was originally in. his name. It was ao\d. and transferred by him to the company, the office of which was boated in Bydney. Some time before it was transferred, he believed be held it in his name for the company. It could have been transferred several months before it was. He thought it had been done. The property was actually transferred on the 7th of October. He was a shareholder in the company, and held 1000 paid-up shares. Plaintiff was engaged by him on behalf of the Bright Smile G.M. Co., and he knew the work was lo be done for that company. An advertisement to tkric effect was inserted in both papers, and the tender was addressed to the " Bright Smile' G.M, Co." Witness was acting rs supervisor, trad was to receive £1 per week, but in this respect be woe in the same position as plaintiff, r.s be had not yet been paid. [The notice of tho incorporation of the company in-May last wan produced.] The company had a bank account. [Bank book prcduoed.] Could not say why the men had not been paid. His instructions from the directors were thaft the money would shortly be forthcoming. The accounts sent to him by the men were at once forwarded by him to the office in Sydney. Ho never carried on business as the-" Bright Smile G.M. Co," under which title he was now sued. Mr Melhose waa tho local director.—-To the Court: Could not say when thera was a probability of the men being paid, but he had every reason to believe tbat the money would be forthcoming. M? Northcrofts You will recollect, Mr Crawford, that some time ago I wanted to out off a portion of the ground j but I wbb led to believe ttmt a lot of foreign capital waa coming in, and that tho ground would bo worked in a manner Bucb as could not ba done with tho capital available locally. In consequeuce of these the whole of the ground was allowed to be retained.

Mr Crawford eaii this was true, and be belioved the proiaieoa would bo carried out. Bui he had not got Bixpenoo out of Lbs alFoir. He had, in fuct, lost "money by it. Ho was now in the same position aa Mr Syriti, as tho Company wero also indebted to him. Lotus Melhoea stated thut be was a Bhoreholder in the Bright Smile G.M.Co., and held tho position of local director. Tho ground was cold to Myors, 8011, and Co., of Sydney, in February last year, and the original four shareholders received 5000 paidup share* between theia. The namea of the shareholders woro advertised, and Mr Craw ford"was appointed supervisor, A sum of £349 had bcea paid away by tho eorapsny einoo its formation.—Croßß-examined by Mr K>nriok: Believed the company had been duly registered. Could not say whether it. was advertised in the Now Zealand Gbzs'te. Tho head office was in Pitt street, Sydney. Had no local office or place for serving of legal notices bo far gb he waa awai'e.—To the Court: He balieved tto men would get the nrney. HU Worship again reviewed the conversation mentioned above, when a portion of the gtonad was abouttobeoutoff.and in reply to Mr Northoroft the wifcnees said that he had every reason to believe that the promises then made would ba fulfilled, lie had D6on led to bolit ye that they would be by the Sydney people interested.

Mr Miller submitted that all tho facts showed that defendant was only sgont for the oompßny, and.thafc ths latter w^re liable The work wa§ dearly done for the compsny, to whom, acoordiug to plaintiff's own written tender, he gave credit. Considering that the oompany were to find tools, he foiled to see how plaintiff could say iv his evidenca lhat he looked to dofendant for payment, and con* tended that judgment must bo given for defendant.

Mr Kenrick said tho reason tbat defendant had been sued es the " Bright Smile G.M, Co," wag because there was no such company in New Zealand. The company was not regiß> tered here, and had no legal slakes, and consequently the principal was not divulged to the plaintiff in this case. The Foreign Companies Act provided tbat a company must be advertised in "a newspaper and the Government" Gazette, and also have a local office. The advertisement in the paper produced, however, merely said that " there will be an office." He could not obtain any evidence as to the company being registered in this colony, although due search had boon made. There being no principal, the agent, he contended, held bimielf liable.

In rep'y, Mr Miller said that the Act pioTided that once Iho company was formed, certain things should bo done—such as registering the 'company fes Hew Zaaland— under certain pains and £jhaUiea in the event of it not being done. Xijs oomp&oy was liable to ft penalty of £o a day, and this was what Mr Kenriek should have p,oae for. But in the present osss the Foreign Companies Act did not apply, inasmuch aa the oompaiy, and not Mr Crawford, was liable.

The 8.M.: Then who is to be sued ?

Mr Miller t The company can be cued, but it is an expensive process. The manager of the company in Sydney must be served. The 8.M.: The mistake was in lotting the men go on with the work when there wt.3 no money to pay them.

Mr Miller said that Mr Crawford had done his very beet.

His Worship said he vrao afraid the law was on Mr Miller's aide, but he would like to take b little time to look into the matter. There were aleo one or two other points that wanted lookiog into. He did not anticipate that Buoh a thing as this would crop up, as he was led to understand that thero wag a big company at the back of the concern. However, as Warden of the goldfield he was not going to let the ground ba held if this sort of thing was to go oq. The case would bo adjourned WBtiUbe 6tb of February,