TRANSHIPMENT OF CARGO

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2868, 5 September 1916, Page 7

TRANSHIPMENT OF CARGO

QUESTION OV UNNECESSARY EXPENSE.

In tho Magistrate's Court yesterday afternoon Mr. AV. G. Riddell, S.M., heard further evidence in the mtorestintr civil action in which the Harbour Board claimed from G. H. Scalos, Ltd.. tho sum of £66 us. Id., for work and labour done in connection with transhipping a largo quantity of wool from the Kowhai, wluo'h was berthed at the Taranaki Streot Wharf, to the steamer Dalmore,-which was lyinjj at tho Railway Wharf. Mr T. S. Weston appeared for tho Harbour Board, and brought forward evidence to show that, under tho cir. cumstancos that were' manifested at the timo it was impossible to berth tho Kowhai any nearer the Dalmoro, because there was insufficient shed accommodation and also insufficient berthnge, in the vicinity. Tho Kbwhai arrived from Napier with about 2000 hales,of wool for transhipment to London. As it was not convenient to placo all the wool on the Dalmore by a given time, and as it was desired to'o-ive tho Kowhai quick dispatch, she was shifted to the Taranaki Street Wharf, the. wool unloaded, and subsequently carted round to the Dalmore. The Harbour Board claimed £66 fo: this cartage. '. '■',*,„,. For tho defence, Mr. A. W. Blair maintained that'there was no heed to berth the Kowltjii at the Taranaki Street Wharf, as there was at least one other berth closer to the Dalmore, that was at the Wool Wharf. In regard to shed accommodation, counsel stated that investigations showed that L Shod on tho Wool Wharf and U and J Sheds, adjacent to tho samo wharf, wero 'quite capable of receiving the cargo in question. Scales and Co had given an undertaking that if the cargo could not be ■ worked quickly enough that the Kowhai Tvould be shifted, but it was never intended that she should be moved to the Taranaki Street Wharf. Immediately, this was known, strenuous protests were made, which woro.of no avail. . Mr. Blair' contended that had the Harbour Boad berthed tho Kowhai anywhere between the King's Wharf and the Wool Wharf, the board would havo had to wool at ita own expense, as stipulated in tho bylaws, tho distance being within a quarto of a mile. In this case he maintainod that Scales and Co: had been put to needless expense. The.board had made a claim, and must justify it. '• ' ' ' ' " Judgment was reserved.