DISTRICT COURT. REEFTON.

Inangahua Times, Volume X, Issue 1576, 20 July 1885, Page 2

DISTRICT COURT. REEFTON.

; ♦ i (Before His Honor Judos Broad.) Saturday, July 18th, 1885. Dunn v. National Bank. This was an action to recover the : sum of £21 10s, being amount alleged to he diie on a contract for work and labor done, j Mr Jones appeared for plantiff, end \ Mr Lynch for defendants A jury wasempanuelled, of which Mr W. Banks vas chosen foreman. William Dunn : lam a builder in Reefton ; Mr Lewis told me to perform ; the work for £18 4s 6d ; I have per- j formed the contract, except making a table and varnishing; Mr Lewis altered his mind, saying he did not think he would have the ta>>lc made ; we went to some trouble over it and were prepared to make it ; let a subcontract to Haifofd to varnish the hank, when Mr Lewis stoppd him ; the same job was afterwards completed by Mr Lewis ; with the exception of the items meiitiotifd, have done all the work provided in the original contract ; felt was not in the original apeeifiea tioris, and tho inspector asked me whut it would cost to deaden the walls ; 1 said sawdust would cost £6, but that felt was cheaper, and the work would

be cleaner ; he agreed to have tbt* felt, [ and I put it on ; it does swell of pitch, but is the only kind of felt nsed in the building trade ; it did not matter to me if it could l>e smelt from here to New York, if it was in the specifications ; Che extras charged for were all duly performed ; the shifting of the door was not in the specifications ; the door in the counter was an extra; defendant agreed to pay the extra ou the paper ; the pigeon 'boles was an extra ; defen dant would riot \vt me fix the pigeonholes ; sweju* tbe amount is dne, that the extras were performed, and that the charges are fail aid just. By Mr Lynch : Never refused to carry out the work ; tin litter produced is in roy writiug; did not agree that the case should be referred to Gardner ; did not tell Gardner that I wonld accept his award ; I reee.it e<! f.lie letter produced from defendant; ho offered £18 4s to settle the case ; there, was no extras charged in the first claim wade by me, which was £2o 12 ; the dispute was about the valne of t lie felt. By His Honor : I never agreed to accept Gardner's estimate of the work. Examination contiuued : I recriv« d a letter from Mr Lewis on the 19th Jnne. explaining the cost incut-red by him in completing the work; don't know whether I replied to that left v; there was more, then 253 between us then ; if tliey would have paid 259 for the felt it would have settled the case ; don't know what expense he has incurred ; it does not trouble me what he expeuded ; the. felt did smell a. bit ; could not have laid the felt between j the stnds and the rough lining ; tacked the felt ou to rhe rough lining ; it was done in a workman like manner ; the scribing referred to was in the extra work ordered, and was not in the ordinary contract William Newton : I am a carpenter and worked at the National Bank with Mr Dunn ; all the work was done in I the specifications, except what Mr Lewis prevented us from doing; [the remaining portion ot the witnesses' evidence was a repetition of that of plaintiff. G. H. Harford : Mr Lewis told me not to do the varnishiug : I told him it j would I* better to grain it, and subse | queutly I grained it and was paid : ! heard Durn say he would not be humi bugged any longer, and he went away ; i there is always a strong odour from i tar felt ; the smell dies away after a ! time. ; have seen it used to deaden a ! ceiling by nailing it on the ioist and j bwrding ov*-r it This dosed the caw* for the plaintiff. Mr Lvri'h having briefly opened the dt'fe»i«*e calinl. j Isaac Lewis :I am manager of thf I Reefton branch of the National Bank of New Zvatand ; Dunn submitted a statement of the cost of the work required, and I told him to proceed witli it ; plaintiff went to work, but left the work to do work elsewhere, as also did New ion ; seven days after commencing I complained to plaintiff and be said 1 could get somebody to value the worli done and get somebody else to complete it ; plaintiff then took up hit basket and left, a*>d I got anothei carpenter to finish the work ; I then left for Lyeii and instructed the clerl not to allow Dunn to go to work again the specifications provide that th< door was lo be put " where, required '* plaintiff told the inspector that li< would do any little extras that migh' be required and not charge for them plaintiff drew the specifications am got his own price for the work withou competition, and it was thoroughly understood that he wonlH do the work as required ; I objected to the felt as also to other work done, am he said " wait until the job i finished"; the effect was that wi could not live in the room for tin odour of tar from the felt ; if the fel had beeu nailed on the studs theod^u might have gone np to the roof, !>n being nailed on the rough lining. ha< to come into the room ; it cost £2 1 to remove the felt and repapermg th< room ; an expense of £7 18s was in curied through the. noncompletion o the original contract; swear distinctly that Dunn told me himself to get j man to valn<* the work done and em ploy auether carpenter to finish it plaintiff offered to settle if I wotilr make him an offer, I did offer €18 Is 6< and he wanted 25/- more; I re fused it on the ground that th< felt, even if it had been the righ description, was pnt in the wrong way there was nothing to prevent its beinj nailed on to the stnds, which wonlc have allowed the odonr to escape to th< roof : I had to pay 359 for getting tin work examined ; am quite clear thai plaintiff told me, to get another car penter to finish the work : on the Monflay plaintiff came and Miked whether he should go to work and 1 told him I had engaged another . carpenter ; the repairs were, required in ! the business part of the bank, and it was necessary that the work should be got through as quickly as possible. ; the i extras were not put into the first • account rendered by plaintiff. By Mr Jones : the specifications do not say that the table was to made out of the counter ; the table was to , he made " as directed." T saw the felt i before it was put up ; I objected to the j felt, but cannot say whether I did so before or after it was pot up ; it cost £'2 Is to pull down what it cost £2 16s t.i put up; I objected to the felt I becanae it was put up wrong, even if iit was the right thing to put up ; plaintiff did not put a lock on the front door ; do not think Dunn did anything to the door ; he was working at the partition. By Mr Lynch: I complained to plaintiff that I had been annoyed at the manner in which the whole job had been carried on, and he then said that I conM «et another carpeuter to coiunle'e i . aud value the worn J alieattj Uuu«s

William Gardner: I examined Dunn's work; it was not completed according to the specifications; the platform was too small ; Dnnn came to me aud said he was willing that Tt shonld estircate the work and he wonfd accept it ; I had not at this time sent in my report* it would not have been a workmanlike thing to nsil the felt on to the studs ; that would not have got rid of the odour. By Mr Jones : Was not called i»to see the bank before D»nn comnenoed work ; I took all uij information frtm the specifications and from Mr Lewis ; it in possiMe I might have had reason to alter my opinion had I seen the premises before Dunn commenced work. This closed the case, and eoonael having agreed to* waive addresses to the jury, the latter retired, and after a few minntes returned with a verdict for plaintiff for '£24 6s 6d. and ootU.

11 Decline or man. "—Nerroos Weakness, Dyspepsia, Impotence, Sexual Dd..ility, cured by "Wells' health Kenewer." Druggists Kempthorne, l-osser & Co., Agents, Christcharth. •• Rough ox Rats," — Clean out rats, ...i.-e, flies, ants bed-bugs, beetles, , s-vLs skunks, jack-rabbits, gopher*. ) typists. Kei»pthorne, Prmsar kO\, Agents, Christehnrch