The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1874-12-26 00:00:00

ACTION FOR WAGES AT THE DUDLEY
COUNTY COURT.

SHORT V. GREENWAT.—At the above Court;
before Mr. Rupert Kettle, This was an action in
which Joseph Short, miner, sued Messrs. Oreeuway,
charter masters, of the Oak Farm Colliery, for ..n2
tis. 9d. wages alleged to be due. Mr. Stokes ap-
peared for the plaintiff, and Mr. Underhill (in.
structed by Mr. Cartwright) was for the defendaus.
In opening the case, Mr. Stokes said there were
seven other cases, but his Honour's decision in the
one now called on would be given in the others.
Plainliff. on goingto work on aparticular morning,
was told by Mr. Joshua Oreenway that he should
have an alteration in the stint. He and the rest
declined, and as defendants refused to give the 11,
day's notice, they presented themselves at the pit
each morning for a fortnight, and now sued for
their wages.
Joseph Short said on the 29th September one of
the defendants came to him and the others, and
said;if they we to work they wouldihave a rise of
stint. He wanted to alter the "cock up." The
stint he said would be altered a quarter of a yard
in the face, and this would be about a foot in one
day's work.
Cross-examined The old men had left in con-
sequence of this alteration. He was not told when
engaged by Mr. Oreenway that, he proposed to
make an alteration. Defendant did not begin with
the fresh mode of wonting oa the first time he
(witnsss) went to work. None of the men employed
told him that the masters were measuring on
the " new stint." lie knew there was as little
alteration, but not in the measurement. He did
not object to that alteration. The only alteration
at first was the place in which they holed. They
•• holed" in the dirt. Any part of his work was
measured from the time he was engaged, by the
"cock-up,' Men had been working before he
went into the pit, hot they did not tell him there
had been an alteration in the mode of working.
The defendant did say he was to go on with the
holing the same as the rest, and he could not put
him to anything else. His objection to work was
the mode of measurement and the rise of stint.
His stint along the face was two yards for a day's
work. Underneath they went a yard anal a (tarter
to the "cock-up." The ordinary mode was seven
feet in the face, and a yard and six inches under-
neath. That was the alteration he complained of.
but it was the same stint he was now working at.
It was the same kind of coal.
_ _

John Cox said he had worked three days at the
old stint, and afterwards the chartermasters said
it must be altered. He and the other plaintiffs
objected.
Other witnesees gave corroborative evidence.
Mr. Underhill said that the defence was that
the alteration was very slight, that the men broke
their contract in not agreeing to such a kl wall
matter. The defendant Oreenway told them
distinctly that at the end of a day or two he should
have an alteration made. Joshua Oreenway said
he told the plaintiff he should have the work
done the same as at Mr. Harvey's. He said he
should have three yards and a half acres the face,
and a yard and six inches under. Before they
came to work he arranged with the men, and said
he should have an alteration. A man named
Hickman went away, but he came back and worked
at the altered system. Plaintiffs said they would
come on the new plan if the old workmen objec-
ted.

Thomas Hickman said he was present when Mr.
Greenway told Short and the others that they had
to go on as they were at Harvey's.
The learned Judge said the defence was not used.
out with sufficient clearness to enable Messrs.
Greenway to resist payment. He wished to state
publicly that he thought it would be no dime!.
antvage to either party if the mode of measurheig
by the " cock-up " was discontinued. If prop
knew what he did of the system it would at once
be discontinued: it was like having a yard measure
made of india-rubber.
Verdict for plaintiff.