LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2120, 11 April 1914, Page 14

LAW REPORTS.

MAGISTRATE'S COURT CIVIL BUSINESS BETTING TRANSACTIONS UNUSUAL POSITION. An interesting judgment summons case camo before- Mr. W. G. Itiddcll, S.JI., at the Magistrate's Court on Thursday. Tlio plaintiff in the case was William Cunningham, an employee of ai'Carthy's browery, and tho defendant was Thomas AVobby Twist, agent, both of Wellington. Plaiutiff, who was represented by Mr. 11. l< , . O'Leary, claimed from defendant £22 10s., being a sum of money received by tho defendant on or about Novomber '20, 1913 for tho use of plaintiff. Mr. 0 Leary stated that m November Cunningham gave Twist £3 to invest on a horso running at tho Fielding rnco meeting. Twist followed up horso racing a good deal, and Cunningham gave Twist the money, as tho latter had stated that ho was going to attend the meeting. Tho horse won aud paid a dividend of £7 10s., and this made tho dofendaivb liable for £22 10s. to the plaintiff. Twist had not paid the money, and counsel alleged fraud on the part of defendant. His Worship: I do not think you can call this fraud. Mr. O'Leary: Well, sir, how could anything be more fraudulent in a civil senso than this failure to pay over t]io nioiiej'. Mr. O'Leary then called his client, who stated that he knew Twist well. On November 24 ho gave him £1 to put on a horse named "Lady Laddo," on the first day of the Fielding meeting. Witness was given a receipt for tho amount, and on the following day ho gave Twist a further £2 to put on the same horse. Tho race took place on November- 29, and Lady Laddo won, paying a dividend of £7 10s. He did not hear from Twist on the , , day of tho race, but on tho next day he received the following telegram:—"Missed train Saturday; see you Tuesday, Tom." At this stage His iWorship suggested that tho defendant had better comewhere he could hear the ovidence nioro clearly. ■ • : Defendant: Yes, Your Worship. I am very much -surprised at the turn the case- has taken. I did not know anything about this allegation of fraud. I think I, had better get a lawyer. His Worship agreed With the defendant( and ordered the case to stand- over until April IG, to allow defendant to secure legal advice. • ■'"'-' DAMACED BANANAS. A CLAIM FAILS. Mr. W. : G. Riddcll, S.M., delivered his reserved decision in the caso Griffiths and Co., Ltd., v. tho Union Steam Ship Company, Ltd., a claim of £45 17s. Id. for losses caused through damage to a. shipment of bananas from itarotonga to Wellington, ex the s.s. Tahiti. The evidence went to show that tho bananas in question were loaded in good order at Itarotonga on Novomber 27,1913, and arrived sis days later in Wellington, with 151 cases badly damaged. The plaintiffs alleged defective, stowage and insufficient ventilation during tho voyage, which resulted in the damage- referred to. Tho defendants relied (inter alia) on Clause 7 of tho bill of lading, which excepts, among other risks, that of heat of holds, effects of climates, decay, etc., on the voyage, and Clauso 9, vbich sets out that fruit, etc., is carried below at the shipper's risk. The facts showed that the only bananas damagod wero those carried in the No. 1 fore-hatch. Those carried in other parts of the-ship wero landed in good-con-dition. It was shown that the'bananas were stowed in the usual way, and steps were taken on. the voyage to insure sufficient ventilation by means of windsails leading into tho hatch. T-ho usual practice was followed in order to ascertain tho temperature. 'There was evidence, also, that no signs of over-heat-ing wero detected during the voyage. "In discussing tho question of liability," stated His Worship, "Mr. Justice Willis said: 'If a shipment of sugar took place under a bill of lading such as the present one, and it was shown that the sugar was sound when put on board, and had been converted into syrup 'beforo the end of the voyage': if that was put as an abstract case I think tho ship-owner would not be liable because there may have been storms which occasioned tho injury without any want of care on the part of the captain or crew; the injury alone would be no evidence of negligence on their parts." His Worship held that the precautions taken by tho defendants' servants to obtain temperatures and secure proper ventilation were reasonable under the prevailing circumstances, and that the damage was caused by inherent liability of the bananas to deteriorate, combined with the effect upon them of tho atmospheric conditions during the early part of the voyage. Judgment would be for the defendants, with costs amounting to £4 38s. Mr. A. Blair appeared for the plaintiffs, and Mr. Levi represented the defendantsr • HORSE V. MOTOR-CAR. i The sequel to a collision between. a motor-car and a horse on the Wadestown Head was heard on Thursday beforo Mr. W. G. Kiddell, S.M., when Alexander Eoss, engineer, sought to recover from Georgo Nash, dairyman, the sum of £15 damages. ■ • • It was set forth in tho statement of claim that through alleged negligent driving on,the part of defendant's sorvant the horse of the defendant collided with plaintiffs' motor-car, which suffered damago to tho extent of £15. Mr. M. Luckie appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. T. M, Wilford for defendant. : After hearing part of the evidencq, tho Magistrate adjourned tho case until April 21. COMMISSION ON MOTOR-CARS. Before Mr. D. G. A. Cooper, S.M., Herbert Leicester sued John William Reado for £20, commission alleged to bo duo to plaintiff by the defendant on account of the sale of two motor-cars. Mr. A. M. Salok appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. D. M. Findlay for defendant. After hearing tho evidence,' His Worship reserved his decision. DEFAULTING DEBTORS. Judgment for plaintiff by default of defendant was entered by Mr. W. G. Biddell, S.M., in tho following cases :— Hodle.y Victor Evens v. Harold Ogdcn, £6 os., costs £1 ss. 6d.; Vacuum Oil Company Proprietary, Ltd., v. Goldsbrc and M'Connell, £47 6s. 2d., costs £3 Cs. Gd.; Vcitch and Allan v. George Cauton. £5 Is., costs £1 3s. 6d.; W. Mullane v. Andrew Bketone, £5, costs £1 r>s. 6d.; Blundell Bros., Ltd., v. Edwin R. B. Daniel, £12 7s. 6d., costs 155.; Margaret Blytho v. Hugh M'Silvrey, £9 25., costs Bs.; Wriidsor Manufacturing Co., Ltd., v. W. Morris and Son, £11, costs £1 10s. Gd.; John Bovcridgo v. A. D. Walton, £19 Bs. 4d., costs £1 10s. Cd.; Thomas Fisher v. John Nelson, £26 18s. fid., costs £2 145.; Mary M'Vinish v. John Nelson, £2 ss. 2d. S. T. Evatt was ordered to pay Bates and Lees £2 Is. 6d. on or beforo April l

23, in (lefnult forty-oight liours' imprisaiinicnt; Joseph Stanley was ordered, to l>a,y tlio Wi'llingtoii Motor Car Horso Drivers', and Livery Stable Employees' Industrial Union of Workers ill Bs. on or liofon? April 23, in delimit furtyeiglit hours' imprisonment.