TRADE TRICKERY.

Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1696, 13 March 1906, Page 2

TRADE TRICKERY.

GISBORNE FERTILISER CASE. MERCHANT PLEADS GUILTY TO MINOR CHARGES.

.(Fes Press Association.) Auckland, last night-. At tbe Police Court to-day John Sohisobka, an Auckland merchant, was charged with having committed breaohe of the Fertilisers Act, He pleaded guilty to having about October last caused 17 packets to be filled with a fertiliser materially at variance with the particulate registered in connection with the brand upon tbe packages, and also admitted a charge of having failed to deliver to a purchaser of artificial manure an invoiee denoting its quality. ;~ Schifchka pleaded not guilty to an indictable charge that he fraudulently imitated ah authorised trade mark oMi’-jr Gisborne Sheepfarmers’ Frcz n M*eat Company upon bags containing fertiliser, Mr F. E. Baume appeared for the defendant. Mr 8. Mays, who prosecuted on bebal of the Cirown solicitor, stated that the Giaborne Sheepfarmers’ Freezing Company were the proprietors of a certain brand of bone and blood manure- Sebisobka was their agent, and abont October 4th last a Mr Smith, a Onehnnga farmer, gave an order through, a Mr Cunningham, to obtain two tons of Gißborne bone and blood manu--). Mr Sohiechka agreed .to supply it, and in due course 17 2ewi bagii of manure were delivered. . On reoeipt of this Smith was surprised at the gre&t weight of each bag, and came to the coftolusion that it was not blood and bone manure. The proportion of ammonia in the manure sold by Schisebka was 2.4 per cent., whereas the genuine brand contained 9 to 10 per cent., four times as much ac

Sohisohka's. One of the eaoks, branded with a similar mark to the Gisborne brand, was forwarded to the Company, whioh reported that the brand was not theirs, though tbe wording was the same, Evidenoe was given by Mr Smith as to ordering the Gisborne Company's manure, and haying been supplied with an inferior article. During a conversation with the defendant the latter at first maintained that it was Gisborne manure, but afterwards admitted that. it was not that manure.

Mr J. A. Pond, Government Analyst, who had analysed samples taken from the lot of manure sent to Smith, and also a sample of the Gisborne Company’s manure, stated that the manure supplied by the defendant ooDtained 2’4 per cent, of ammonis, and the Gisborne Company’s about 10 per cent, of ammonia. The Gisborne Company’s manure contained 10*28, 9 69, and 1016 por cent, of ammonia la three analyses he had made.

Mr Mays : How much of the sample you received from Mr Hall would be re. quired to produce the same result as the Gisborne Company’s manure ? Witness : About three times as muoh.

To Mr Baume : Oalculating on a reasonable basis he (witness) estimated the sample of inferior manure worth £4 9a per ton, and on similar basis the Gisborne Company’s manure was worth £5 15s Id per tom

Norman Rees Jones, working manager for the Gisborne Farmers’ Frozen Meit Company, said that the company had not authorised any person to use their brand.

After other evidence had been taken, defendant, who reserved his defenoe, was committed for trial. He was allowed bail, self in 4)400 and two sureties of £2OO each.

The two minor oLarges to which defendant pleaded guilty have not yet been dealt with,