THE LIABILITY OF SEEDSMEN.

Patea Mail, Volume IX, Issue 1116, 23 November 1883, Page 2

THE LIABILITY OF SEEDSMEN.

Buchanan v. Laird. At the Hawcra Court on Wednesday the above case was heard. Plaintiff was represented hy Mr Hamerton (instructed by Mr C«p!cn)and defendant’s interests were looked affrtr hy Mr Fitzherbert. The issue is rather an interesting one to farmers, the facts briefly slated being as follow : The plaintiff, Donald Buchanan, purchased 601 hs of turnip seed from Mr James Laird, of Wanganui. The seed was sown upon 60 acres of land and a crop of more than half rape was the result. The present action was to recover £9O as the damage sustained. The evidence of plaintiff went to show that samples of seed were sent him to to select from, and that he examined the seed when it arrived, but could detect nothing wrong. The land was virgin soil, and when the rape came up Messrs McLean ami Livingstone inspected it and assessed the damages at the amount now claimed. The loss plaintiff sustained was through not having winter feed, and having to sell cattle at a loss. In crossexamination, plaintiff slated that he discovered the rape before Christmas, but did not communicate with Mr Laird until March. Mr Laird's catalogue, stated that “ the very greatest care is used to supply every article true to name and of good quality ; hut I can in no way be responsible for loss of crop, or give any warranty,” Plaintiff said that he did not see that before ho ordered the seed. The sowing was done with a machine that had been used for rape and other seed, hut he had no rape seed at the time. He got a little, seed from Mr Jackson to finish off with. There was a little rape seed in that, hut he was not awru'e that it was Mr Laird’s seed. Mr Livingstone gave evidence.that, Mr Buchanan’s loss would he over £IOO. His experience of Mr Laird had been satisfactory, Similar evidence was given by Mr Geo McLean. Mr Laird had the reputation of being a careful, trustworthy seedsman who would not knowingly supply bad seed. In this case about 48lbs of rape would account for the quantity of rape there was in the field. James Locker deposed that the land and machine were perfectly. clean, and that the seed was labelled turnip.

For the defence Mr Fizherbert said he would suggest that cither the rape seed was in (he ground dormant, the land, perhaps, having been cropped with rape previously ; or else there was rape seed in the machine, or partly both. Mr Laird, the defendant, in his evidence, said that every precaution was taken at his establishment. He had over tons of turnip seed, and it was from this consignment that Mr Buchanan and others had been supplied. Over sixty people had been supplied from tbo same consignment, and he had not had a single complaint except from Mr Buchanan ; never (old Mr Buchanan ho would make an allowance ; told him he would come and look at the field if he could get lime ; but he said be did not see what good he could do, and he could not find time ; as to the clause in the catalogue it was similar to that contained In all catalogues ; he guaranteed nothing ; ho had had 2q years experience ; he bought from the best sources, and the best proof of his success was that this was the first trouble of the kind he had had. He supplied Messrs Lnpton, Hearn, lon, John McLean, Hundley, and others. Hastings Moore, storeman for Mr Laird, deposed that no rape was sent out on the day that Mr Buchanan’s seed was packed. Mr Hearn staled that the seed he bought from Mr Laird turned out well. Under certain circumstances rape would lie dormant for 20 years. Evidence of a similar nature was given by Messrs John Ion," John McLean, I. Lnpton, and S. Handley, and after Mr Hamerton had cited a number of cases to show (he law upon the subject, the R. M. (Capt. Wray) intimated that he would reserve judgment until next Court day.—Abridged from Star.