Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

FATHER v. SON.

(Per Press Association.) ', WELLINGTON, Nov? 3. A somewhat unusual civil action was heard in the. Magistrate's Court this morning before Mr W. R. Haselden, S.M., when G. T. Croft, of Petone, builder, claimed £48 15s from his son William Croft, of Waituna West," Feildmg, also a builder. Plaintiff alleged that his son owed him 42 weeks' board and lodging at 16s a week from April, 1906, to February 1907, for washing at Is 6d a week for the same period. £10. money alleged to have been lent, afld £2 for fishing-tackle and a rifle said to be left with defendant for sale. . Mr Peacock appeared for the. plaintiff, and Mr T. M. Wilford for defendant. Plaintiff's case was that his son had lived with him from 1903 to the end of 19015, when Croft Jun. went to England, returning in April, 190©, "practically penniless;" said counsel. He camp to his father and asked the latter to keep him. His father agreed to take the wanderer home again on the same terms as before—l6s a week—but^ said ho would not press for payment until his son waa in a position to "pay. Defendant was now earning £4 a week as clerk of works for the Wanganui Education Board. Plaintiff nearly fainted durirfg cross-examination byi counsel for the defendant, and had to retire/ The case for the defence was that Croft, Jun., had always paid his board. The £10 claimed as "money lent" -vvas really owing to him by his father as architect's fee in drawing plans of a house owned I>V Croft, Sen., after he had nsl-ed for the usual fee of £12 10s. That defendant himself had to provide for the family after • ?->laintiff had turned them out; that the "wnshing" had never been paid by plaintiff at all; and that the fishing-tackle and rifle had not been sold by defendant, but were left where plaintiff 'had deposited them. After hearing the evidence, without the two witnesses for the defence being called. His Worshin jrave judgment for the defendant, with "costs, arid expenses totalling £6 7s.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WC19101104.2.25

Bibliographic details

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12652, 4 November 1910, Page 5

Word Count
349

FATHER v. SON. Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12652, 4 November 1910, Page 5

FATHER v. SON. Wanganui Chronicle, Volume L, Issue 12652, 4 November 1910, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert