James Adam Masterton (1871-1942)
Law Clerk, Queensland, Australia
James Adam Masterton was a solicitor's clerk, born in Dunfermline, Fife, Scotland and emigrated to Australia where he settled. However, he does not seem to have been a very successful law clerk, fell on hard times, aggravated by a period of drunkenness, and he is no stranger to the Police Courts, initially as a litigant or defendant through his busienss dealings, but later as a vagrant with no visible lawful means of support. One would like to think he got over his drink problem, but if he did it took some time. He does appear in 1930 providing quasi-legal support in a divorce case, so perhaps he did get his house in order. He lived to the age of 71, so his liver lasted at least till then.
Genealogy
James Adam Masterton was the eldest son of Daniel Masterton, joiner, and Jane Hutton Stewart who married in Dunfermline in 1841. He married Edith Robins in Kalgoorlie, Western Australia and had two children, both of whom died young. He became estranged from his wife when he turned to drink. He is in the group of Mastertons flourishing from Culross. A fuller genealogy of James Adam Masterton can be found at this link
The North Queensland Register
Ancell v. Masterton.
Mr Ross (instructed by Mr Wynn Williams) for the plaintiff, and Mr Jameson - (Instructed by Marsland, Jarvis and Co.) for defendant. This was a case arising out of a share transaction, and the plaint was that defendant had engaged plaintiff on or about October 4th to purchase 300 Victoria and Queen contributing shares at seven weeks, delivery, and that as defendant failed to take them up, plaintiff sold them at the risk of the defendant. The plaintiff paid £121 5/ for the shares, but when they were sold, it was at a loss of £73 6/8, and for that amount he sued.
The pleas of defence were: (1) That defendant was never indebted, and (2) That he did not promise as alleged. (3) That the defendant agreed with the plaintiff to purchase from him 300 contributing shares in the Victoria and Queen, upon the terms that the same should be transferred and delivered by the plaintiff to the defendant upon November 22nd, but that the plaintiff was not, upon the twenty- second day of November ready or willing to transfer or deliver to the defendant the said shares, if so, the defendant would have paid for them. (4) That at the time of making the supposed agreement, or at any time between that day and the 22nd November, the plaintiff was not in a position to transfer or deliver the said 300 shares or any of them. (5) That the plaintiff did not at any time, as required by the rules and regulations of the Charters Towers Stock Exchange, deliver or tender to the defendant separate or any documents representing the said 300 shares, or any shares. (6) That if, contrary to what he believes and contends, he is liable to the plaintiff for any amount in respect of the alleged re-sale of the said 300 shares, the defendant as a plea of cross action, by way of a set-off, says that on the 18th day of October, 1898, the defendant instructed the plaintiff to sell the said 300 shares, which were at a much higher price than they were on. 7th December, when the plaintiff re-sold them, but the plaintiff wrongfully omitted and neglected so to do, and the defendant says that the amount of damage he has sustained equals the amount claimed by plaintiff in the plaint, and against which the defendant is willing to set-off the amount of damage so sustained by him.
The case for the plaintiff was, simply stated, plaintiff on October 4th bought by order and on account of defendant (subject ito the rules and regulations bf the Charters Towers Stock Exchange) 300 Victoria and Queen contributing shares at 8/1, the total ainoun! being £121 5/, at seven weeks' delivery. On October 18th, by which time the shares had considerably fallen in value, the defendant wrote to plaintiff, "Dear Jim,-Sell 300 Victoria and Queens, seven weeks' delivery, for me. They are anyhow. Can you square me In any way. Am told they will see 4/- yet. Leave matter entirely with you." On October 19th plaintiff did not sell any shares for defendant, as they dropped, but on October 20th, he wrote defendant: "Re Victoria and Queens. Have you any reliable information about the mine. Shares are so low, the loss on the 300 purchased on your account, forward delivery, wiii be very considerable. You led me to believe they were for the manager. If so, it is all right. Can you call in, or advise what is best to be done before call?" Nothing further occurred until November 28th. when plaintiff wrote: "Dear Masterton,--What am I to do re Victoria and Queen? I am holding 200, and expect the other 100 at any time. They are overdue, having been bought on October 4th. Not receiving an answer to that, plaintiff wrote again on December 3rd to defendant, stating the shares had been bought, and he could not afford to hold and pay interest. On December 5th defendant wrote to plaintiff: "As you failed to carry out my instructions, I decline to accept any shares you may have bought on my account." On December defendant wrote plaintiff enclosing Form F of the Stock Exchange rules, asking him to take delivery, and stating his intention to sell them at plaintiff's risk. He also offered to refer the matter to the Committee of the Stock Exchange. On December 7th plaintiff caused the sale of the shares, which realised £50 8/4, leaving, with commission, a debit of £73 6/8. Plaintiff again on December 10th, asked for a settlement, and offered to refer the matter to the Committee of the Stock Exchange, and on December 13th, received a letter from Marsland and Marsland, stating they were instructed to defend any proceedings brought against defendant.
In his evidence plaintiff said he did not tender the shares on November 22nd, the date they were due, but he had several conversations with defendant by telephone. He sent Forms F and F1 to keep him in order with the Stock Exchange rules. Six days after the time he told plaintiff he had 200 shares, in hand, but expected 100 at any time. He considered that anything within seven days, was a spot transaction, and he always gave reasonable time in forward delivery sales. He did not care to send shares up to defendant in his office, because he thought defendant's employers might object. Mr Tilley gave similar evidence as to the delivery of shares, and the time in which forward delivery shares might. be tendered, and as to the custom of delivering shares to employees In offices.
Mr Jameson applied for a non-suit on plaintiff's case, but this was refused, as plaintiff contended be was only defendant's agent, while defendant said, plaintiff was a principal. Mr Jameson, in his opening, contended that it would be ridiculous if a delivery of shares a week after they were due was attempted, because they somtimes vacillated a great deal in such a short time. How could seven weeks' delivery mean eight weeks? He contended there must be an actual tender of the shares on the given date, and quoted Vordenade v Gregory to show the seller must be ready to complete his contract at the given time.
James Adam Masterton said he bought the shares on October 14th, but he sent plaintiff a letter instructing him to sell on October 18th. On October 20th he received plaintiff's memo, and immediately consulted Mr L. W. Marsland. On that advice he saw plaintiff, and asked him if he specked the shares or bought them. Plaintiff took him into his office and showed he had bought shares from Messrs. Bright and Co. and A. McCalium. He then saw he was in for a loss, and was willing to take the shares up on November 22nd, the day when they became due, but they were never tendered. He had no contract either with Messrs Bright and Co, or McCallum. Under cross-examination he said the shares were not in his physical control on November 22nd, or he would have sold them. He received no communication till October 20th, and none from then till November 28th.
Messrs Wilson and Thorpe gave evidence of the delivery of shares, stating how they sent them out to clients, but there was no material difference on this point between them and the former witnesses.
After counsel had addressed, the jury, His Honor summed up. He reviewed the correspondence, and sald that plaintiff had bought shares for the defendant under the rules of the Stock Exchange, and therefore could sell them at the risk of defendant if he failed to take them up. On 18th October defendant wrote plaintiff, practically leaving everything In his hands, but the latter, acting in the interests of defendant did not sell. They had to decide whether plaintiff was an agent of the defendant, or a principal in the contract. If he was a principal he should have been there to complete the contract on November 22nd, when the shares became due, but as an agent, his possession of the shares was defendant's possession. When defendant refused to take them up, plaintiff sent the forms F and F1 of the Stock Exchange, and afterwards sold the shares at defendant's risk, and the difference in the amount paid for them and the amount realised was what was sued for. The whole case rested on the point whether plaintiff was a principal or whether he was an agent.
After about eight minutes retirement the jury found plaintiff was an agent for defendant, and returned a verdict for the full amount. Judgment entered accordingly, with costs.
The North Queensland Register, Townsville, Queensland
Monday 20th March 1899 p15.
The Evening Telegraph
The Temple of Justice.
THIS DAY.
(Before Mr. F. P. Parkinson, P.M.)
A LINGUIST.
James Adam Masterton was brought up charged with using language not to be found in any English Lexicon. Two constables gave evidence showing that they went to a house in Church-street where they found him having a row with three women and using obscene language which nearly caused a blight to settle over the whole neighborhood. Defendant said he went down to his wife's house in Church-street and asked for his Gladstone bag. Immediately he got to the door three of them started on to him and called him for everything. The P.M. informed the defendant that he was not brought there in connection with a quarrel with his wife. He was there for using bad language. He said that he did not use the language complained of; he called his wife a red female dog. In reply to the police he said he was not drunk, he was suffering from malarial fever and had two brandies with quinine in them. He asked his Worship to deal leniently with him as he had a job to go to. The P.M.: You are trying to send yourself to the dogs. Fined £2. or 7 days.
The Evening Telegraph, Charters Towers, Queensland
Friday 11th Dec 1903 page 2
In the Small Debts Court this morning before the P.M., James A. Masterton sued John Mathers for the recovery of £2 for money paid on account for Mathers' meat.
James Adam Masterton said he had been in partnership with Mathers; he sued him now for £2; he had been supplied by Gard with meat and he had paid for it. The P.M. : Had it anything to do with the partnership ? Witness : No; Gard asked me to pay it; no one else asked me to pay it. The P.M. : Well the Court cannot help it if you undertake to pay a man's debts. Witness : Well I undertook to pay it; defendant asked me to make it all right with Gard; I made it all right with Gard; I understood that I was to see that the account was paid; I paid it by a cheque; the cheque passed through my account.
The P.M. : Didn't you get a receipt from Gard? By defendant : Is not that part of the partnership? Witness : No . By defendant Didn't I have to carry the baby altogether? Witness : No, I carried the baby. By defendant : How much did I receive out of the partnership? Witness : About £87 too much. Defendant tendered the advertisement showing the dissolution of partnership. John Gard, butcher, deposed to having supplied defendant with meat to the extent of £2/2/-; Masterton guaranteed the account and paid it by cheque; it was a private account for meat. Solicitor : What was done with the meat? Witness : I don't know what was done with it. It was supplied to defendant. Defendant : Was not this a partnership account? Witness : No.
Defendant : Did not Masterton get his meat for nothing for keeping your accounts? Witness ; Yes. Defendant : Didn't you come and whistle and take him away from his business to look after your business? Witness : I never interfered with his business. John Mathers said, the business was dissolved on the 2nd of May; I got nothing out of the business; I asked Mr. Masterton to pay this debt in particular. Solicitor : Did you ever hear of a firm paying a butcher's account? Witness : I am getting the experience now. We had no deed of partnership. I wonder if he paid my rent account, which he promised to pay?
The P.M. : Well I cannot see how a man can get out of paying his private accounts for the common necessaries of life. Witness : I got nothing out of the business. Verdict for plaintiff with costs.
The Evening Telegraph, Charters Towers, Queensland
Tue 10 Oct 1905. Page 3
The Northern Miner
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 26, 1907.
(Before Mr. E. Eglinton, P.M.)
At the Police Court on Wednesday morning, Edith Masterton proceeded against James Adam Masterton for sureties of the peace. Mr. Boyce appeared for defendant; and pleaded guilty to the complaint about using threatening language. Defendant was ordered to enter into a bond of £10, and two sureties of £5 each to keep the peace for six months towards his wife. In default to be imprisoned in Stewart's Creek gaol for three months, or till the sureties are found. 48 hours allowed.
The Northern Miner, Charters Towers, Queensland
Thursday 27th June 1907. p2
The Evening Telegraph
JIMMY MASTERTON BEFORE THE COURT.
THREE MONTHS' HARD.
At the police court this (Friday) morning, before Messrs. W. Ferguson and J. W. Ward, J's. P., James Adam Masterton was charged with having no visible lawful means of support.
This defendant was recently fined £2, or two month's imprisonment for creating a disturbance, Sub-inspector Graham prosecuted. Patrick Mullan stated: At 2.50 a.m. to-day I found defendant lying asleep in the yard of William's Blue Bell furniture shop in Gill-street; I asked what was he doing there and he replied “having a camp," I asked him if he had permission to be there and he replied "no, it is all right;" I asked what was he doing for a living and he said he had work to go to; I asked where was he going to work and he said "with Mr. Boyce, solicitor," I asked him if he had a home to go to and he said he had none, and I arrested him on a charge of having no visible lawful means of support; he said "For God's sake, don't do it;" I then took him to the lockup, and on being searched, he had no money or property on him; I have known defendant for the last month, and have not known him to do any work during that time; have seen him frequently about the streets and several complaints have been made about him; he is usually in company with bushmen and "drunks" about the street.
To defendant : I don't know if your business collecting takes you about the street. Mr. Ferguson. He has said you have not done any work for the past month. Defendant: I heard him say that, but I wish to point out I cannot do hard work, as I am not the same as a man with a pair of good legs. Defendant (to witness) I suppose I could have done business without you knowing it?
Witness: You could, in your mind, but I don't think you would get much commission for collecting from the ones I saw you with. Defendant: But there is about £70 owing to me on Charters Towers for money leat. The Bench: Witness does not know that.
Frederick J. Hearn, labor agent, stated : About a month ago defendant came to my place; he only had what he stood up in; he said he had no money, and I told him I did not want him about the place; he went away and came back again in about an hour and sat on the verandah; he asked how was business; I told him I had my work to do and had no time for him; that night I told him he would have to clear out; he went but next morning I found him coiled up under a tree in the front of the house; I roused him up and told him it did not look well for a drunken man to be lying in front of the place, so he got up and went to the back yard; later on he went into a back room and lay down on a stretcher; I gave defendant some food as he was starving; Dr. Redmond is my landlord, and I only rent a portion of the house: defendant was not lying in one of the rooms l am renting; Dr. Redmond came through and seeing Jimmy he shook him up and told him to clear out; defendant still hung on, and I gave him his meals when I had my own, because I could not get rid of him; defendant stayed there for about five weeks; he used to sit on the verandah smoking, and reading; he wrote a few letters at my dictation; as a rule defendant used to go out for about one hour after dark; defendant never brought any food for himself into the house, and was living on my charity; defendant came to me on Saturday last; he had received a postal note from Townsville for about 8/6, of which he gave me 1/6 and spent the rest in drink; I have seen defendant with two or three shillings besides during the time he was at my place, which he had borrowed from people; I remember defendant being arrested last Saturday, and I again saw him on Monday in my dining-room; defendant was talking to a person there and I told him to clear out, or I would send for the police; he went; on Wednesday night I found defendant in the same room at my place as he had previously occupied, and I put him out and he went away; last evening someone walked off with the whole of my supper.
Mr. Ferguson: You can't say defendant took it. Witness to defendant: You wrote some letters at my dictation to sugar mills. That was the case for the prosecution.
James Adam Masterton stated: I am an accountant, not residing any where; I have about £70 coming to me in this town, which is sufficient to keep me; (Witness gave the names of persons owing him money): I had arranged to take one of Smith's rooms as an office; the sub. told me he would not press the charge if I would leave the town at once, and I am willing to go.
To the sub. : I have been at Chillagoe and Stannary Hills; I was in Townsville and while there was charged with vagrancy; I was discharged on promising to leave the town; I never asked any people from Charters Towers for money while in Townsville; well, not more than three people; I came back to Charters Towers about the 1st May; I earned 5/- from Mrs. Pedley at Mosman Park; I also did some work for Mrs. Mills at St. Patrick: I wrote two letters for her and she gave me 5/-. Sub.: You were charging pretty stiff prices; lawyers would do it cheaper.
Witness: I did some work for Hearn and he told me to stay there till I got ahead of it; Hearn only told me on last Monday night to clear out; Hearn did find me under a tree; he did not wake me up as I was not asleep; I did not "shake" Hearn's supper; I was fined £2 last Monday, and a charge of vagrancy was withdrawn as I promised to find work; I tried to collect some of the money that is owing to me. Sub. : It Is easy to say people owe you money.
Witness: I was foolish to lend it. To the sub. : Smith said he would let me have a room for an office. The Bench: Have you any other evidence to call ? Witness: That is all at present, but if your Worships will give me a chance I will clear outside altogether. The Bench said it was an unfortunate case to see a person of defendant's abilities in such position, but they thought they would be doing him a kindness - -
Defendant (bursting into tears and shaking like an aspen leaf): Your Worships, I plead tor one more chance.
The Bench: You are sentenced to three months' imprisonment in Stewart's Creek gaol. Defendant left the court in an hysterical state.
The Evening Telegraph; Charters Towers, Queensland
Friday 5th Jun 1908 p3
BEFORE THE COURT AGAIN.
SLEEPING IN A STABLE.
NEARLY WALKED ON BY A HORSE.
James Adam Masterton was placed in the dock at the police court this (Tuesday) morning on a charge of having no lawful visible means of support. Mr. E. Eglinton presided.
When the case was called Sub-Inspector Graham said defendant has been previously convicted at this court on a similar charge, and had only been released from Stewart's Creek gaol last Friday. He came back here and since then several complaints had been received by the police, and defendant had been sleeping in the stable of the Sportsman's Arms Hotel.
The P.M.: Who are the people who made the complaints. Sub-inspector Graham consulted Constable Mullin, and then told the bench there were several complaints.
The P.M. stated defendant had a wife here, and he did not see why defendant should not be given an opportunity of having a living. Sub-inspector: In this case defendant said he was going to leave the town. P.M.: I am not going to ask him to leave the town. Sub.: : His wife has turned him out. P:M. (to defendant): What do you propose doing?
J.A.M.: I am thinking of going out to Cloncurry, your worship. P.M.: I think it would be better for you to try fresh fields. I am not going to punish you this time. I wish to give you a chance. Sub.: A man took a horse to the stable of the Sportsman's Arms Hotel last night, and the horse nearly walked on something, which the man found was defendant; the man informed Constable Mullin , of the circumstance. P.M. Did the landlady of the hotel complain to the police. Sub.: No; she did not know he was there. Defendant said he thought a friend. would lend him his fare to Cloncurry, and with his worship's permission he would not offer any further evidence. . .
P.M. (to defendant): Do you think you can raise your fare? J.A.M. thought he could get a friend to pay his fare to Cloncurry. He was just as anxious to get out of. this place, as the police were to get rid of him. He had asked the governor of Stewart's Creek goal [sic] to give him a pass, to Cloncurry, but he said he could only give him a pass back to where he was sent from.
P.M. : Very well, you are discharged.
The Evening Telegraph; Charters Towers, Queensland
Tue 8th September 1908 p3
James Adam Masterton was charged with having no lawful visible means of support. Defendant stated he would start straight away for the Bluff, walk out, and start afresh in life. Jimmy pleaded most eloquently, begging and praying for another chance. He said he had been around to all the mills and mines in town; but could not get put on. He had got a message to go out to a place away from hotels. He. would have a fine chance of straightening up.
The P.M.: How far is the Bluff? Defendant: Thirty miles, your Worship, arid I'll walk straight out from the court.
The Senior-sergeant stated that defendant would walk till he came to the first hotel at which he could run up a score and he would stop there.
Defendant: Not at all, Sergeant. The P.M. said that he knew all about the man. He would discharge him this time, but his pleadings would not work another time. Defendant: I won't come before your Worship again. Thanks. Good- bye.
The Evening Telegraph; Charters Towers, Queensland
Tuesday 17th November 1908. p3
The Northern Miner
MONDAY, JANUARY 24, 1910.
(Before Mr. E Eglinton, P.M.)
James Adam Masterton. for using obscene language in Gill Street. Queenton, pleaded guilty and was fined £2 or seven days.
The Northern Miner, Charters Towers, Queensland
Tuesday 25th January 1910. p3
James Adam Masterton, charged with having no lawful visible means of support, was discharged on promising to leave the town.
The Northern Miner, Charters Towers, Queensland
Thursday 3rd March 1910. p2
The Telegraph
Charles Durant, 52, labourer, was charged with stealing from James Adam Masterton, a pair of boots, valued 15s. Evidence of arrest was given by Acting-sergeant Power, after which the defendant was remanded until to-morrow morning.
The Telegraph, Brisbane, Queensland
Friday 10th May 1912, page 3
The Central Queensland Herald
WIFE'S DESERTION.
ROCKHAMPTON, May 10.
The unfriendly attitude adopted towards him by his mother-in-law and his wife's attention to a man who was boarding with her mother were the causes which Henry George Skinner attributed to his wife leaving him away back in 1909. He related these circumstances to His Honour Mr. Justice Brennan in the Supreme Court yesterday, when he applied for a divorce from his wife, Stella Alice Skinner, on the grounds of desertion. There was no appearance of Mrs. Skinner, and after hearing the husband's story His Honour granted a decree nisi, returnable within three months. Mr. E. R. Larcombe (instructed by Mr. D. P. Carey) appeared for the petitioner.
Mr. Larcombe read an affidavit by James Adam Masterton, retired law clerk, who served the writ on the defendant at Rothwell Chambers, Brisbane. She admitted she was the person mentioned in the writ.
The petitioner, who described himself as a clerk, resident in Rockhampton, said he was married to the defendant on January 2nd, 1908, at Rockhampton, according to the rites of the Presbyterian Church. After marriage he lived with his wife in a house next to his mother-in-law. The mother-in-law was always unfriendly towards him and that was mainly the cause of the trouble. After a while his wife went home and she went to and fro until she eventually remained with her mother. There was a boarder staying with his mother-in- law and his wife was particularly attentive to him. "That", added witness, "was part of the cause of the trouble." He was continually objecting to her attentions to the boarder, and in 1909 she finally left him. Her mother then moved to another part of the city, and after a time he called on her. His mother-in-law met him, and when he said he had come to see his wife she ordered him out. That afternoon he received a solicitor's letter cautioning him not to go near the place.
On September 1st, 1909, a child of the marriage was born. He went to see his wife in hospital and she told him not to come again. She sent the account for the confinement expense, however, and he paid it. His wife then left for Brisbane and he did not see her again until after Carnival, 1912, when she came to Rockhampton, Again he called on her and he found the boarder on the verandah. His wife would not see him and he asked the boarder what he was doing in the company of his (witness's) wife. An argument ensued and after telling the boarder he was running a bit of a risk he left, the lady of the house asking him not to make a disturbance. He had not seen his wife since. His Honour found the issues proved and granted the decree nisi.
The Central Queensland Herald, Rockhampton, Queensland
Thursday 15th May 1930