RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Southland Times, Issue 863, 11 December 1867, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

WEDNESDAY, 10th DECEMBER, (Before H. M'CuUocb. Esq., R.M.) Civil Case. Thomson v Caldek* Blacklock & Co., This was a claim for £19 19s 6d, lighterage on. 94 tons of goods, ex " Prospector," from London. Mr Harvey appeared for the plaintiff ; Mr Macdonald for the dependents. The action was brought to try the legal construction of the wording of a bill of lading of goods consigned to the defendents, the bill of lading stating that the goods were to be deliverd on the New Biver wharf. The plaintiff (the master of the Prospector) in his evidence stated that charts in his possession, to which he referred in London, had marked on them the wharf or jetty at the Mokomoko, and, knowing from the soundings marked on the chart that he could with safety lie alongside that wharf, he, signed the bills of lading for defendents goods under the belief that he could land their goods at the Mokomoko- When, however, the vessel arrived in harbor, the defendents insisted that the goods should be landed at the Invercargill jetty, and it was ultimately agreed that this should be done and the present suit brought to ascertain who was liable for the lighterage rendered necessary from the ' vessel drawing too much water to enable her to be brought to the Invercargill Jetty. Mr Macdonald, for the defence, contended that the New River extended as far as the Invercargill Jetty, which was the usual landing place for goods, and produced an Admiralty chart, showing the channel of the New River estuary extending beyond the Invercargill Jetty.

He produced several bills of lading by the same vessel wherein the goods were -specified to be landed in the port, and argued from this that the goods mentioned in these bills of lading might have been delivered to the -consignees at the Lower Pool in terms of the bills of lading, and that then the vessel would have been light enough to have proceeded to the Invercargill Jetty and landed defendents goods there. Mr Robert Buchanan and Mr Daniel Dunlop were called, and gave evidence to the effect that the Invercargill Jetty was the only landing place for goods. Mr Harvey addressed the Court, and in the course of his remarks observed that the Mokomoko Jetty being the nearest wharf in New Eiver Harbor, the defendents were bound to receive the goods there or pay the expense of lightening, as there could be no mistake in the meaning of the wording of the bill of lading, viz., — the meaning the master put upon it when he signed the bills of lading. The Mokomoko Jetty was laid down on his chart, and on the maps produced a branch railway extended from Invercargill to it and therefore it was surely most convenient to the defendents to have their goods landed there. Prom the maps produced the Invercargill Jetty was not in the New River at all. The Resident Magistrate said that if the Invercargill Jetty was not" in the New River, they were neither of them in the New River, and therefore the only thing to be decided was the usual landing place for goods arriving at the port. It seemed clear that the Invereargill Jetty was the usual landing place and therefore judgment must be for defendenst, with costs.