WARDEN'S COURT.

Inangahua Times, Volume X, Issue 1632, 27 November 1885, Page 2

WARDEN'S COURT.

(Before Mr Warden Bird).

Tcrc isDAY, NovrsiDEß 26th, 1885.

A PPLICATI )VS,

Nil Desppramlnm Co., \ w ater*race from Deep Civek ; aUo for tail race. Granted.

Edwin Grey— business site, 22, and 223, Reef) on. Granted.

Jno. Moni. c wuler race, tail-race and dam, A 1 lord River. Granted.

PoUCK V. IU/F.B

An npplicalion l»y the police for an order against defendant for the amount due for maintenance of his stepchild.'Pti in the Industry School. Mi* North apptaiM for defendant. The defendant jpaid an order had already been midi^jiu'nst him for the maintenance of tbjjjcliildi en ; l»y that order the custodJ^H'ihe children had l»een given Co his wife who Was liv'ng apart; he found it a hard matter to pay the iminrenance now demanded of him, and could not pay any furfchet sum ; liis wife was receive ing an allowance of 27/6 per week ; his wife Ims a cottage and two sections of her own on the Duller road, and lives in it. By the Bench ; When employed 1 ' received £± per week ; have only averaged ab.xtt £3 per week during last year. By the Police: Have some property in Reef ton, l»ut it is mortgaged to its full value; have gone into deWt in order to keep np the payment of the muin-enanie to my wife; my creditors are pressing me. This closed case Mr North submitted that as the j wife had custody of the children, and they had been sent to the Industrial \ School on her application, no order could now be m;ide against defendant. His Worship refused to make any order, Inn intimated his intention to represent the case to the an thorites. JACOBSEN V. COCKQUHN. His Worship said as defendant was in gaol, no order could be made against him. The case, would stand over io the second sifting in Jannaiy. Oxli-.y v. James Jones. Claim for £5 17s id for goods sup plied. No Appearance of defendant. Judgment for the amount and costs. FoitsTTH k Mast;-.u.s v 11. Wick. A clajm for £ for goods supplied. Judgment l»y default for amount and costs. Mr North for plaintiff. Same v. James Poweh. Claim fw £ — ~ for good*; no appearance j idguieut for a?muat and; costs. Mr North for plaintiff. Same v. Jam 1 s Gu^n. Claim for £ for goods ; Judgment by default for amount and costs. Mr North for plainti?. Haxkix (Puy & Co. ) v. R. Mi/jjs.

Plaintiff said he had paid t"2 into Court as conduct money for dofeiidait, I nit the latter had not shown up.

His Worship rend a letter from defendant offering to pay 20s per month and returning £2 conduct money forwarded him.

Order made for payment of the debt in instalments of 10s weekly ; in default of fiist payment one months imprison* ment.

W. B. Apchkb v. Huoh s. Claim for £13 12s lOd for goods supplied.

Mr Lynch appeared for plaintiff.

]Vfendant pleaded not indented,

W. B. Archer :• I am a storekeeper n,t Boatman's and supplied defendant with the goods charged ; rendered the account to defendant and he did not deny tile liability.

By defendant: Never put '• account rendered " on hills which havf been settled ; the amount now swd for is for goods supplied in 1882, the charge for which hud beeii held over at de« fendant'B request.

Judgment for plaintiff for amount and costs.

Same v. Gurhie.

Claim for £10 8s lid, for goods supplied. Mr Lynch for' plain tiff. Defendant admitted a part of the liability.

Sam 3 v. Graham.

Claim for £1 Us 6d for goods enpplied. No appearance. Judgment for amount aud costs.

Mr Lynch for plaintiff. O'Mallby v. TnanSahua County Council.

This was an action to rfcover th« stun of £C), being an amount alleged to have been wrongfully deducted from plaintiffs final payment on mainteii ance contract on the Reefton Gvey road.

Mr North appeared for plaintiff, aud Mr Lynch for defendant.

Mr North having opened he case called —

JaniHS OMailey : I am a fawner and contractor residing on the Grey road ; look n contract from tho Council to maintain two sections of the Grey ro:-i.cl ; the contract expired on the 16th July ; the engineer never took the load off my hands ; fresh tenders were simply cull.d and the new tenderer took over the road ; al>ont a fortnight before my con trait expired the engi n<>er came down and went over the work ; the only thing I remember him pointing out wns a few places that he said required morn metal ; don't recollect his saying anything to me at this time iit>outpliu:king,h«spokeabout pluukiut; ou a former occasion, fputiu

wherever reqnired ; I had some planks | left when my contract was up, and I ••onld have pat them down had they !»een wanted; the final payment was passed hy the Council after the contract was completed, and tliey dedu.-ted £6 from th^ amount planking; do not say I cat lied out the specifications to the letter l>ut substantially I did the work in terms of the contract : the last time the Engineer came down to the road was about Au^nst; the final payment was made about a month after the, contract closed ; do not know why the Council deducted the t'6 ; heaiff rumors that it was for phmkinu, hiu do not know as a fact.

By Mr Lynch : L do not produce a certificate from the Engineer saying that I am entitled to the £6 ; asked the Enginneer for such \ certificate, but cool dnot get it ; did not read over the voucher before signing it ; was glad to get what money I could from the Council.

By the. Bench ; Believe I carried out my contract fairly well ; was led to think this because the Engineer never came near me to examine the work.

By the Bench : Before going over the road 1 received no notice of work

James Molloy : I took a contract for the Council l>ttt have since desposed of my interest in it ; we went on the contract in July ; had a conversation with Mr Garvin a'»ont the manner in which O'Malley had left the bridges; we heard that Mr (turvcii had deducted £6 from 0' Malley and I then demanded that we should have the £6 and not the Council as wfl-WHt-p the sufferers by O'Malley's default; Mi 1 Garven then said that O'Malley had put in all the planks required in his contract.

By Mr Lynch : We put in a good many plank 3 on culverts; all the culverts on the Grey road are in a !><id condition ; don't know of any plarks that O'Malley ought to have sup plied.

This closed the cisc

Mr Lynch for defendant suhraittod that there was no case to answer.

E. B. Garveu : I am County Engineer ; on two occasions d tiring plaintiffs contract I went down and exanMMH<l the road went through from end to end 'out only saw plaintiff on ibe Recoud occasion ; then told him of certain planks ir quired to b« put down ; reckon tbat fourteen planks would lie necmary to do the work ; at the conclusion of the contract the planks had not been put in as required, and acting uurti-r a clause in the specifications I deducted £o from the final payment ; the specifications proviili' tlmt no final payment slia'l Hp made without the, final certificate of

the Engineer ; barl a conversation with Molloy about the condition of O'Mal ; lev's contract, l>ufc it did not refer to the section in which M Hoy was interest**! ; plaintiff bus not since put the planks ; Molloy's evidence was sn>»stji!iti:illv true.

By Mr North: Tin" culverts required planking were three in nnm'^r ; to the 1-est of my l»eli«-f planks have Ween put in since o' Mai ley's contract was I taken over ; swear positively that I I tolil O'Msilley of the planking about the 251h June ; have b^en over Molloy's section within the past few days ; did not go down and take over the road from O'M alley ; never told Molloy that th« planking was required on JVleGeady's section.

By t'ue Bench : Cannot swear that the- have lieon yet replaced ; believe they have been put in ; the cul vests are in good order now, but were not at the time I spoke to O'Malley.

By 51;- North: I cannot swear that a uo'tT plan]; has been put in to the culvert near the Little Grey htnlge ; the Council has not since put the. planks in ; the new contractors would U; required to do it.

This closed the case for the defeu-

(lanl;?.

Judgment for pl&lutilT for amount claimed and costs.