MAGISTERIAL.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 11509, 4 October 1915, Page 5

MAGISTERIAL.

am cases. (Before Mr H. W. Bishop, S.M.) CLAIM FOR DAMAGES. Robert Napier (Mr A. S. Taylor) .sued Hugh Bruce (Mr F. W r . Johnston) for £5, damages for assault. Robert Napier, the plain till, said t.iut on August 'l, while iu the employ of defendant as a driver, ho met with an accident, and returned to work on i August 26. He asked defendant about insurance, and defendant said he won hi make inquiries. Later defendant told plaintiff that he had had liis more than lie was entitled to. FiaintiU; said lie would go to the insurance rigant.s himself ami see about it. He had been paid £2 8s by defendant, Defendant tlcw into a rage and sacked plaintiff on tho spot. Plaintiff expostulated, and defendant called him a f; dirty swine." and hit him several times about the head and neck. Afterwards defendant said that plaintiff hit him first, and plaintiff told him he was a dirty doc; and a liar. Plaintiff had been told by Dr Gerald Russell that h.e must stay 'away from work for a month after August 4. as the result of the nccident. He" wos ill iv-hen defendant assaulted him. To Mr Johnston: He was away a fortnight- His wages were £2 8s a week, and he was cutitied to oO per cent as insurance. The £2 8s paM him by defendant was equal to two weeks' insurance money. John Barnsby gave evidence that bo faw Bruce ho'ding Napior by the, j .wrists and struggling, aud heard Bruce I dismiss Napier. He separated the [ combatants. He saw no blows struck. Tie thought Napier wa* calling out for I help before he arrived on the > scene, but could not, be certain. Napier was rather an excitable man. The defence wan that the plaintiff was tho aggressor, and that tho proper insurance had been paid. The row ws s en used bv p'a iut ift misunderstanding the position in regard to the insurance. Hugh Bruce, the defendant, gave evidence that be dismissed plaintiff because plaint'ft »poko to him in a very insulting itmnuer. Napier claimed insurance for two week's aud four days, Mid ocfendanl told him be- had received insurance for two weeks and fnll pay for another week. Defendant had always heiwnded plaintiff and his iiisiiiiv. I:'!; I :uitiif at!acked defendant -.vh'ie was taking a tray out of a cart. Dofencjant put down the trnr "nd sniack'r'd plaintiff's ours. Plaintiff eried out. and then Bnrnsby came on tlio been'-. Defendant's ;vftitude towards plaintiff hud always j been friendly, j Fred 'Murray gave evidence that j v/hfc:i Napier was awa.v he tried to buy ; the horse and cart Napier u.sed to drive, j hut Bruce stud be was .saving them for NapiTr. The Magistrate said that he could • not decide who starred the assault. I Judgment, would be for the defendant, ! witOOOt (VStS. ' J dDGMEST BY DEFAULT. JiKlgment was given for the plaintiff by default in each of tho following crises ; —Joiln Stevenson and Thomas Arthur M'llibbon .'. W liliam C». Weir, . £ ;7; Williams. Ivron. v. John Hall, i'l' V| S (id; J. J. Niven and Co. v. Avery D(>wc!l, £2 fZU B'.l; (ieorge Evans v. Sylva.nu.s Oos los od; Beatb and Co.j Li'ii. v. Sydney Pierson, £4 '4s; J. W, M'Clintock v. S. C-oobe, £4o li's; Natioual Morty-'if.n and Agency C-o of Now Zeafual. Ltd., v. jtt. H. Jobiin, £2O 6s lOd; Jlastoy-Harris Co.. Ltd., v. .V. B. Luok, £.10; Ross and Glendiuiag, Ltd.. v. James Smith, £6 17s sd.