PIGS FOR BACON.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXV, Issue 4681, 31 March 1924, Page 4

PIGS FOR BACON.

DISEASED ANIMAL CONDEMNED. COMPANY HAS TO PAY. J I An interesting civil action arising out of the sale of pigs to a bacon company by a farmer was heard at the Palmerston North Magistrate’s Court recently before Mr R. M. Watson, S.M. The action was brought by A. S. White, farmer, of Kopane, • against the Manawatu Bacon Com- . pany, of Palmerston North, and he claimed the sum of £3 ss, being the purchase money for one pig at 6d per pound, delivered to defendant conibany. ' The ease for the plaintiff was stated by Mr J. Graham, who said that on Du ember 9 last the company’s buyer ea’led on White and asked if he had any pigs. Plaintiff had six, and the buyer said he would take them, and told plaintiff to take them to the Rongotea siding. Plaintiff, however, said hs would sooner kill them himself, as by ,so doing he would obtain a further %d per lb., but stated that lie could only kill four a day. Th a buyer agreed, and purchased the four pigs at 6d per lb., handing White r. purchase note bearing the following paragraph: ‘We have this day taken delivery and purchased the undermentioned pigs from you on the terms specified on this purchase note.” N. 8.: Payment ns to be made on the dead weight computed from the above live weights, subject to deduction for insurance against condemned pigs." . . . “Any dispute in regard to price must be settled with the buying agent .at the time of delivery.” This not was signed by the company’s buyer. The buyer then departed, ami White and his assistant slaughtered four pigs ready for delivery on the following day. In the morning the company’s buyer again called and saw two of the pigs hanging in a shed. He remarked on their good quality, out did not examine them thoroughly. Later, the company’s lorry called anil took the pigs to the factory in Palmerston North. Three days after the sale plaintiff called at the factory for payment, and then learnt that one of the pigs had been condemned and that tbe company was only going to pay oi. account ofl three of them. When pigs are purchased for bacon is is always deducted by the companies for insurance against any ’tarcase which might be condemned, and this was done in the case of pigs. Evidence bearing out the foregoing was given by plaintiff.

The defendant company was represented by Robert Davidson, managing director, who disputed the claim on the ground that the pig was diseased. The purchase of the pigs and the givinsr of tbe purchase note was not disputed, but he claimed that the pig should never’ have been slaughtered for sale, but should have been de-> strayed and buried. Any onie with the slightest experience could have seen that the animal was very diseased. When the carcases arrived at the factory the diseased one was quickly recognised and sent to the de'-tructor. Defendant also that the purchase note given to White’ was really only applicable to live pigs, and, moreover, was only given on account of fluctuating prices to enable the company to kniow where ,t stood in relation to a purchase.

The cross-examination failed to elicit any information on the point of insurance as to whether the particular pig was covered. His Worship, however, closely questioned defendant, \yho stated that insurance was effec:ed on what were apparently sound pigs,, .and defendant illustrated the system by an explanation. Live pigs were received at the works, slaughtered, and hung on the hooks, an examination revealed them to be perfectly sound, and the insurance operated them. The Government inspect-, or then carried out a closer inspection, examining the glands, and if signs of disease were discovered the pig would be condemned and a certificate to that-effect issued. The Government men paid the company 2d per lb for the pig, and the companv paid the vendor in full out of its insurance fund. His Worship still thought that, in fane of the sale note, the company would have the pig insured, but defendant claimed that the scheme did not operate when dead pigs were brought in. The pig in dispute was in a particularly bad state, and White should have known it.

At the conclusion of a thorough ex-, amination the Bench considered that defendant was under a misconception as to how the company stood in the

matter. After reviewing the circumstances leading up to the delivery if the pigs to the company by White, Mr Watson pointed.to the purchase note and the clauses referred to above. ■ In accordance with that,” said His Worsh'p, “ the pigs were, no longer White's property. They were (he company’s property. Latham, the company’s buyer, left White to kill the,pigs, and such action was entirely at the company’s risk.” In conclusion, the Magistrate said that he must find for the plaintiff for. the amount ci limed, and recommended to the defendan: hot to Use the style of purchase note again.