Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE FARMERS' ALLIANCE SEED CASE.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE STAR. Sir, — My attention has been drawn to your issue of the 2lst ult. in which you report the case of Simpson v. The United Farmers' Alliance Ltd., and as your report is not according to fact, and consequently misleading I must ask you in justice to the Alliance to publish the following facts : — First of all I would state that the cocksfoot referred to was not purchased by the Alliance at 4s per sack, but at the current price of 2£d per lb. In the first instance Mr W. Richmond purchased 12 sacks of cocksfoot at auction at 4s per sack, but afterwards finding he did not require this quantity he deputed Mr H. Hickford to take 4 sacks into Palmerston and dispose of for him ; Air Hickford sold the 4 sacks by sample to Barraud & Abraham who when delivery was offered, noticed from the brand on the sacks that it was part of the parcel sold at -^ auction by Mr Abraham and informed Mr Hickford of the fact, refusing to Lake delivery. Mr Hickford then offered it to the Manawatu Farmers' Co-operative Association and to the Alliance, both of whom offered what they considered the current value of it, and Mr Hickford elected to accept the offer made by the Alliance of 2£d per lb, which was the then current value of eood seed. It was acknowledged by Mr Abraham in the evidence given in the case that tho sample was bright, clean looking seed, and the fact of his firm buying it and not knowing it was defective until they recognised the brand on the sacks proves this, and as it is not customary to test the germination of cocksfoot unless there is something suspicious in its appearance, no blame can be attached to the Alliance over the transaction. Had the Alliance known the seed had been purchased at auction by Mr Richmond they would not have taken it into their store at any price, as it is their desire to only sell farmers the best of seeds, well knowing the importance to the farming community of having reliable seeds. Apologising for taking up so much of your spsc?, 1 am, etc., E. W. Mullins. Wellington, June 12th, 1895.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/FS18950614.2.27.1

Bibliographic details

Feilding Star, Volume XVI, Issue 292, 14 June 1895, Page 2

Word Count
382

THE FARMERS' ALLIANCE SEED CASE. Feilding Star, Volume XVI, Issue 292, 14 June 1895, Page 2

THE FARMERS' ALLIANCE SEED CASE. Feilding Star, Volume XVI, Issue 292, 14 June 1895, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert