CLAIM FOR LOST BOOK

Hokitika Guardian, 18 October 1930, Page 2

CLAIM FOR LOST BOOK

(By Telegraph—Pre« Association).

WELLINGTON, October 47,

.. A book, said, to be a first edition worth £l5O, but which two experts are prepared to .say us worth only one •shilling, was the subject of an unusual action in the Magistrate’s Court to recover the book which the defendant 1 confessed he. no longer possessed. The plaintiff was IT. G. Rogers (AinGoodwin) settler of Wellingtonl«ud defendant \J. H... Saunders (Mr Sprott) dealer of Wellington. The bopk was ’said to 'be a first edition ol; Alexander Pope (published 1781-1793) ■ value £l5O. Mr I. S. Barton S.M., pre-f sided. , j . . s to;

to'/Mr Goodwin said the question tp lie' decided was whether defendant; was liable for loss of the book. Mr Sprott admitted defendant received the book from plaintiff, tbqt it not been returned, and could not possibly he returned because it had I,sen either lost or stolen. There werp (inly one or ijwo people in Wellington lylU) could place any values on books, tpiopg >vhom was Mr Johannes C. . Ahdevsan, Librarian of the Turn buff Lihrjiry,i who would; say that the ,bqok wgs, worth Is certainly, pot und t)>a,t if, it .came into Jiis hands he Wqul.d throw it into the waste paper foaWt..' pi - Schofield, Parliamentary liiiraVlan, would say tlie same thing. The value of the book; must be atrived at\ before the costs o'f action could be There i)ud been no negligence on the part of defendant. •-“It isf* an extraordinary claim tq be brougbt/Va claim for £l5O forjin edition of Alexander Pope 17814(83 wjiich could nof. have been first edition because Bop e died in 1774. Plaintiff came from England some yeans ago, with a hobby for collecting ' noks. The books concerned, ,in the case plaintiff bought at a sale in London;for'.£3. Some London dealers in old book) said it was valuable. Defendant was, to. be ; given a commission for effecting a sale. Plaintiff called at times to'collect the book, but was put off by different excuses. It transpired defendant .could not prodime the boojt. 1 , Plaintiff was , en-, titled to'the return of the book. The question of its t value could be entered intq later. . The Magistrate saiu that evidence, as to the value would have to be called and lie adjourned the hearing until next Thursday'to enable that evidence to be brought. ,