My 3rd great grandfather James Baker Worldon and his half brother Richard Worldon are the subject of today's Trove Tuesday post.
Source: GUNDAGAI COURT OF REQUESTS. (1874, December 5). The Gundagai Times and Tumut, Adelong and Murrumbidgee District Advertiser (NSW : 1868 - 1931), p. 2. Retrieved September 23, 2014, from http://nla.gov.au/nla.news-article122755248
GUNDAGAI COURT OF REQUESTS.TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1,
Before the Police Magistrate and Mr. J.B. Elworthy J.P.
JAMES WORLDON v. WILLIAM FULLER, erection of fencing £5 12s. Plaintiff deposed to having contracted with defendant to put up some fencing at Bongongolong, at 1s a rod ; he completed 112 rods of fencing, being partly assisted by his brother, Richard Worldon, but on Monday week last defendant knocked them off work ; witness then asked defendant to pay him for what he had done, but defendant offered to give him an order upon his (witness's) brother for the amount, saying his brother owed him money ; witness refused to take the order, and as defendant did not pay him brought the present action. In reply to the Bench witness positively asserted that he had contracted with defendant to put up the fence and had employed his brother to assist him ; he put up 62 rods himself, and his brother helped with the other 50 rods ; defendant never told him anything as to having bargained with his brother to have this fencing put up in payment of a debt due by the latter to him.
Defendant's evidence was to the effect that he had lent Richard Worldon money, and that the latter had said that he would work the debt out as he could not pay it ; witness spoke to Richard Worldon first about this fencing, and he said he and his brother would do it ; it was quite understood that the sum due for it was to be deducted from the debt owed by Richard Worldon to him.
In reply to the Bench defendant admitted that he had not mentioned to the plaintiff that he was going to deduct the price of the work done from Richard Worldon's debt ; but said he knew it well enough.
Richard Worldon, called by defendant, first wanted to know who was going to pay his expenses, and afterwards corroborated the plaintiff's evidence. It was with his brother, he said, that defendant contracted as to the fencing, and he (witness) assisted him ; he was willing that defendant should retain the portion of money due to him in payment of his debt.
Defendant said Richard Worldon and his brother had made it up between them to get out of paying the money he lent the former.
The Bench held that on defendant's own showing plaintiff was entitled to payment for the work he had done, but they considered that he might claim to retain the money due to Richard Worldon. Judgement for the plaintiff for £4 15s
There were no other cases to be heard.