LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2210, 24 July 1914, Page 5

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COURT

A COMPANY'S OPERATIONS^

APPLICATION TO EXTEND THEM

An application in re'the articles of Issociation of the Awatuna Co-operative pairy Factory Company, Ltd., was made in the Supreme, Court yesterday bofore ft full bench, comprising the Chief Jus- ; tice (Sir Robert Stout), Mr. Justice _ Penniston, Mr. Justice Edwards, Mr. Justice Cooper, and Mr. Justice .Stringer. The applicant company, which carries on: business in Taranaki,. • Fought power to amend it® articles of association, to enable it to considerably . extend its operations. The application first_ came before Mr." Justice Edwards at' New Plymouth in February last, but was refused because His Honour required more convincing evidence that all the shareholders were agreed upon the changes in the company's field of operations, and because of other- specified reasons. Soma time later the application was again before Mr. Justice Edwards, and, with his concuirence, it .was referred to a Pull Bench.'; . When the case camo on for hearing yesterday, Mr. C. B:. Morison, K.C.v with Mr: V. R... Meredith, appeared for the company. No opposition was cifered to the application. Mr.'Morison, in addressing the Court, :. explained that tho company had been ' formfcd in July, 1894, at a time when the dairy industry, was-iri its infancy, and there was no idea that jt would develop in the manner it had done. The company was formed for the purposes of the cheese and butter industry, and. the articles of, association provided for the limited 'expectations of those times only. The original capital was £1000, but it had been increased • from time to time until it now stood / at , £10,000, and tho powers of the company had gradually been extended to the present capacity of' an up-to-date co-operative dairy .concern. Now it •'Bought power to j.uy all descriptions' of animal foods, to retail them among its members, to deal on r he co-operative ■principle in stud stock, to purchase Tiprto-oato dairy machinery for :/ xetail, .nnd to charter or otherwise acquire Ships, steamers, i'nd other vessels for the carrying of the company's produce, .etc. In the year 1907, special resolutions had been carried extending the lompatay's powers, partly in the airection of what was now sought, but owing to failure to produce certain necessary authorities the Court had refused to:' confirm'!these resolutions. It.was-now, Ssked thatythey be confirmed.Mr. Justice Edwards pointed out that %' co-operative dairy company was a Company which made butter .and cheese nnd.sent it on to' London for'sale,' arid : now this company wanted to go into - the hardware and : machinery business nnd y all; tho other departments of business. named. , Mr.: Morison: The intention is to help thefarmer in:bis farm by assisting him to ; improve his milk, ; thus ■ enabling the tompany to send away: better produce.- • :The Chief Justice: .1 think you will find private companies in Taranaki do- . - ing this sort of thing... : , '• . ' Mr: Justice Denniston: Can these enterprises be undertaken against tho . wishes of a dissenting minority of share-' holders!' Mr. Morison pointed out, that there was' no ;opppsiyon"i in the case hefore the Court. The resolutions, after bo- ■ fne confirmed at, a meeting of shareholders, had'been dulyadvertised. . .-Mr. .justice Edwards doubted whether -■- %lie- proposal 'to purchase '.m' acquire ships would be in the interests of shareholders. The Chief Justice: You can't object to the, chartering of vessels if you have goods to put in them. ■ Mr. Justice Edwards (to Mr. Mori-; • son): But' is it reasonable , that you should: be allowed to acquire ships. . Mr. Morison's answer Was that, tho different companies might want to join to charter or acquire ships to compete with the- shipping companies, and to do this they must have" legal power.' -Tliey wanted to be able to got fair rates or run their own vesse's. There was large amount of'money available. Sir. Justice Edwards remarked that he would require something more specific in regard to this proposal and tho . question of combining with other companies. The-shareholders,must bo protected from'anything: savouring of rash ; speculation. ■' Mr: Morison-' pointed out that this would entail extra expense] and would prove unavailing if tfye-Court still wi.thX held its decision. The power, which was sought, had to be obtained even if it Meant newj articles of association. Developments would continue, • and tlio company must keep apace of the times. .After further discussion,'the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) stated that the Court would take time to consider its decision.. .

A DISPUTED AGREEMENT. CASE FOrv INTERPRETATION. In the Supremo Court . yesterday afternoon, the Chief' Justice (Sir Robert Ktout) was asked to. interpret a memorandum of agreement .entered into on April 30, 1912, between John Henry Herman and _Bernard Jacob Weger, both drilling engineers, of Wellington, on the one 'part, and-Frederick Cassin, land and estate agent, of Hastings, on the other part. The matter came before the Court in the form of an originating summons asking for a decision' under the Declaratory Judgments Act, 1908. The plaintiff was tiie Herman and' AVeger Manufacturing and Contracting Go.,- Ltd., of Palmerston North, and the defendant was'the' Mangaone Oilfields, Ltd., of Napier. Mr. A. w". Blair and Mr. G. Samuel Appeared for tho Herman and Weger '.Go., while Mr. H. B. Lusk, of Napier, appeared for. the Mangaone Oilfields, Ltd.

The agreement between the parties was as to certain oil-boring operations. The principal question before the Court related to the matter of casing in a well, ..which had been sunlc, and. to whether the Herman and Weger Company had to leave tho casing in tho well X'T whether tho company was entitled to remove it? And, if the company was not entitled to remove tho casing, was it (the Herman and Weger Co.) obliged to bear the expenso of the purchase of casing for tho second well.

After hearing legal argument, His Honour reserved decision.

CALLED UP FOR SENTENCE. 'A YOUTH IN TROUBLE. ■ Convicted, at the last sittings of the Supreme Court, of receiving stolen goods, a youth, named Thomas Frederick Everest, was on May 12 ordered by Mr. Justice Hoskiug to-come up for sentence when called upon. Subsequently he was convicted of theft' in the Magistrate's Court. In consequence of this latter conviction, he was brought before His Honour the Chief Justice (Sir liobert Stout) in the 1 Supreme Court yesterday morning lor sentence, on tho charge of receiving. Mr. H. H. Ostler, of the Crown Low Office, appeared for the Crown. Prisoner was not represented by counsel. ' His Honour remarked that he had a written statement- from/Everest, but he wanted more information as to what •had been wrong with him in the Hospital; .. Mr, .Ostler stated that the youth had

been suffering from bronchitis and influenza.

The prisoner, in answer to a. question by His Honour, stated tW- he had had work to go to in Palmeffton Nort-li-ra job as a driver—and he nad been working all the time since May, .excopting the period when, he was in tho Hospital. ■ . His Honour said that, unfortunately tho prisoner was not te be believed, as he had previously sworn falsely. The best thing would be for the authorities to 6ee if tliey could find work for Everest up north somewhere, if riot ho would have to go to gaol. He would have been sontew.ed to reformatory treatment if ho had been fit for it, but in view of his recent illnass His Honour did not want to send him down to the rigorous climate of Invercargill. The fact remained, however, that he had been convicted of theft three times m six' months, and that obuld not bo allowed'to go on. The prisoner mentiotifkd the name o* an employer in tho. Wairarapa, for whom ne had previously worked, who would give him work if communicated with His Honour said , the prisoner had better be remanded until Saturday morning, and in tho meautime the employer mentioned could be communicated with. If there was not sufficient time to make tho inquiry by Saturday the matter could bo postponed until a few days later. '

MAGISTRATE'S COURT. EVADING STEAMER FARES. The police cases at. the Magistrate s Court yesterday were dealt with by Mr. D. G. A. Cooper. S.M. Thomas Howarth and Charles Howard each pleaded guilty to a charge of. evading payment of their fares on the steamer Manuk3 between Sydney and Wellington,, and! were fined,£4 10s. (the amount of the fare); in default 14 days' imprisonment. '

OTHER OASES. Herbert. Thomas wa-s remanded till July 29 on a charge of obtaining a sum of £4 from Geo. Tullook by means of a'valueless ctsque. For insobriety, John Hyde was sent to gaol for one month, ana Annie Murdock was fined 10s. Two fi-rst offenders ■were, fined 10s. each, and four others were convicted and discharged.

. civil actions; , A FAMILY AFFAIR. Reserved judgment was delivered by Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M., in the case in' which Herbert Hill, carter, of Wellington, sued Florence Garbes, spinster, of iCilbirnie, for the recovery of certain jewellery' ' valued at £35, and £5 dama&es, if possession could not be obtained. ' . . Tho Magistrate nonsuited the plaintiff, and as'the matter was a family one be refused costs. Mr. A. M. Salek appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. E. J. Fitzgibbon for .the defendant.'

OTHER CLAIMS. Judgment was reserved bv Sir. i Riddell in the case in whioh William. Lmgard and Co. sued Alec Adcock for £30, bein" commission alleged to be duo to the plaintiff oh the sale of a grocery business. Mr.- 0. Beere appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. D. M. Fincilay for tho defendant. • . In the defended case, Wellington Publishing Company,' Ltd., v. A. J. M'Cuidy, a claim for, £6 18s. for printing and setting type, judgment (by Mr. Riddell) was given for plaintiff for. the amount claimed,, with costs. 'Mr. T. G. A. ■ Hislop „apfpenred* for ,:t]ie,'. plaintiff, and the defendant was riot represented bv counsel. . Before: Mr. D. G. A. Cooper, S.M., Agnes Wilkes, of Porirua, sued R. Cox,' of Plimmerton, for the sum of 25., being tho value of two bottles of oil sold to the defendant and which had not been paid for. The defence was that defendant had merely_ acted as agent in the matter for a-third party and was in no Way responsible for the payment of the oil. After hearing the ovidence, the Magi'strato gave judgment for plaintiff for tho amount claimed and costs (165.). Mr. J. Stevenson appeared for ' the plaintiff, and Mr. A. J3. Menteath for t-lid defendant. ■

DEFAULTING DEBTORS. Judgment for plaintiff by default was. entered by Mr. W. 6. Riddell, S.M., in tho following undefended cases:■ —F. and F. Martin v. F. J. Robertson,. £3 75.. 6d., costs 12s, ; H. Ridhalgh v. H. P. Doherty, £6 55., costs £1 Bs. 6d.; A. H. and 6. C. Tripe and 0. V Ellis-v. H. Tankard, £1, costs 75.; Commercial Agency, Ltd.,,v. Norman Campbell, £2 45., costs 135.: same v. J. Mercer, Bs. 5d., costs 55.; J. J. Curtis and .Co-, -Ltd., v. Mrs. Eliza M'llroy, £2 10s., costs 10s.; British' and Continental Piano Co., v. John Cunniffe, £30 lis., costs £2 ,145.; same ,v. E. H. Wood, £49 18s., costs £3 Bs.; R. Kilpatrick v.' Wm. £3, costs' 12s.' 6d.; tho State . Advances Superintendent v. John J. Walton, £25 6s. 10d., costs £1,35.; same .v. Joseph Holmes, £14 95., costs 165.; Thompson Bros., Ltd., v. J. Sing Lee, £37 : 19s. 7d.,. costs £3, 45.; Bing, Harris and Co., Ltd., v. P. G. Jelfory, £48 13s. 6t1., costs £.3 7s.' Gd. v. J. Crozier, £95 "13s. 2d.,-costs £4-175. L 6d.; same v. J. M'Millan, £8 9s. Gd., costs £1 3s. 6(1..; same v. W. Smith, £19\lls. 10d., cost's' £1 10s. 6d.; Books and Papers, Ltd., v. J. M'Nee, £16 9s. Bd., costs £1 10s. Gd.; L. G., Allen v. John Lusty, £8 4s. lid., costs £1 3s. 6d.; E. -Anderson and Co., Ltd., v. Cave and M'Alpiu, ; £2l os. 9d., costs £2 14s. ; Vacuum Oil Co., v. J. Valentine, £3 9s. 7d., costs 10s.; same v. A. Dale, £2 10s. 6d., costs 10s.; A.M.P. Society v. AVm. Brunsden, £17 ss. 9d., costs £1 10s. 6d.; same v. C. P. Rogers, £15 18s., costs £1 10s. 6d.; Jas. W. Kibblewliite v. A. H. Piper. £18 175., costs £1 10s. 6d.; Robt. Martin, Ltd., v.' AVm. R. Storey, £46 19s. Gd., costs £3 lis. 61.; J.-B. Clarkson and Co., Ltd., v. Ogdm and Co., £8 6s. 9d., costs Bs.; Howard Spademan v. Niuiwa- Heremaia, £10, costs £1 7s. 6d. -

JUDGMENT SUMMONS." William M'Millan was ordered, to pay the New Zealand Express Company £2 15s. 3d., before August 6, in default throo days in gaol.

The following members of the Petono Ambulance Division will bs. on football duty oil Saturday next:—Petone Recreation Ground: .Messrs. J. Kyle, F. Kaistrick, W. Cos:, and >J. Hickey. liutt Recreation Ground: Mr.'L.' Parrant. Sharpp's Ground: Messrs. J. Smart and E. W. Andrews.