REGISTRATION OF SHARES.

Te Aroha News, Volume VI, Issue 360, 17 April 1889, Page 4

REGISTRATION OF SHARES.

Auckland, April 13. A case of some importance occupied the at" tention of Dr. Giles, E.M., yesterday and to-day. John Fleming sued Robert Frater for £27 10s, in respect of a certain transaction in shares in the Saxon O.M. Company. Mr Cotter, instructed by Mr Bloomfield, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Theo. Cooper for the defence. Mr Cotter said that the particulars of demand showed rather an unusual c^use of action, and one the like of which he would venture to say, had never been before His Worship before. The plaintiff said that on about March 25th last, one Charles Henry Osmond purchased from the defendant lOOsharesin tbeSaxon G.M. Company registered under the Act of 1882 and having its registered office in Auckland, at 93 9d per share, and handed to the defendant his cheque for £46 ss, being the amount agreed to be paid for the said shares, less dividend ; that the said Charles Osmond received from the defendant a transfer of the said 100 shares signed by John Frater, a brother of the defendant, as transferee ; that Osmond registered the said transfer for the 25th March, sold to one James Jerram as agent for the plaintiff 50 of these said 100 shares at 11s per share, and duly deliveied to the said James Jerram as agent for the plaintiff a transfer of the said 50 shares to the plaintiff, and received from Jerram, as such agent, £27 10s, the price agreed to be paid ; that on the 27th of March last the cheque for £46 ss, so paid by Opmond, was dishonoured, and that the defendant, with full knowledge that the said 50 shares, part of the said 100 shares, had been sold and transferred by Obmond, fraudulently procured a transfer from C. H. Osmond to him of the said 100 shares ; that Osmond received no consideration from the defendant for the said transfer to the defendant, and by the action of the defendant the plaintiff had been prevented from registering his transfer for the said 50 shares, and from deriving any benefit thereunder ; that on or about 27th March the plaintiff presented his transfer of 50 shares from Osmond at the registered office of the Company for registration, but was informed by the legal manager that Osmond then held no shares in the Company, and that the said 100 shares so transferred by Frater to Osmond had been transferred by Osmond to the defendant, and the said 100 shares now stand registered in the name of the defendant ; that the plaintiff on March 21st demanded from the defendant a transfer to him of the said 50 bhares, or the sum of £27 10s, but the defendant refused to do either ; wherefore the plaintiff claimed to recover £27 10s from the defendant by way of damages. John Fleming, the plaintiff, deposed that he had paid Mr Jerram £27 10s for the shares. He had not been able to register the transfer, and had therefore placed the matter in the hands of Mr Bloomfield, his solicitor. He now claimed £27 10s for nondelivery of the shares. Cross-examined : He did not know when the transfer had been presented at the Company's office. Mr W, R. Bloomfield, solicitor, deposed that he tendered the trans er for registration at the Company's office on the 28th of March. He then saw Mr Coleman to try and settle the matter. A summons was issued on the sth, when Mr E. M. Coletnau offeied to return half the shares. Witness said this would not do. In answer to Mr Cotter, witness said the offer of half the shares had been made to amicably settle the dispute, and had been made after a legal letter had been sent denying liabilitj\ C. H. Osmond deposed that he purchased 100 Saxon shares for (.46 5s from Mr Frater, and paid for them by a cheque. At the time he had no idea it would be dishonoured. He had dealt largely with Mr Frater, and they had always taken each other's cheques. He afterwards sold 50 of these shares to Mr Jerram. Subsequently he learned that Mr Jerram was acting for Mr Fleming. He sold the other 50 to aMr Wood. He knew now that these were c'aiined by Mr Alexander. Nine out of every ten transfers on the Stock Exchange had' the names omitted Afterwards Mr Frater came to him, and asked him to return him Mr J. Fraters transfer, as the cheque was dishonoured. Witness told him the transfer had been registered. Witness gave to Mr Frater a second transfer of the 100 shares, also in blank. It had been signed in blank as they were in such a hurry to get it. Witness told them he had already sold the shares. It was only after he was told he had committed a criminal act in selling the shares that he gave the blank transfer. Witness did not remember saying he would go and buy the 100 shares back. Evidence was also given by Mr Niccol, clerk to Mr M. McDonnell, Mr C. Alexander, and Mr N. Alexander, which closed the plaintiffs case, and the Court adjourned until 2 p.m. to-day. When the Court resumed at 2 o'clock today, Mr Theo. Cooper moved for a nonsuit on the ground that the plaintiff's case had disclosed no cause for action. The particulars of demand had not been proved, and there was no evidence of fraud on the part of the defendant, The question at issue, theretore, was whether the defendant had rendered himself liable for a certain sum of money. He maintained that if Mr Fleming had lost the shares his cause of action was not against Mr Frater, but against Mr Osmond. Mr Fleming chose to take the risk of dealing with Mr Osmond, and he could get his money back from Mr Osmond. In the present case there was no agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant, there was no tort between them, and the defendant had no claim for damages against the defendant. Mr Cotter, in reply, said that Mr Cooper had not answered the plaintiff's case. The plaintiff had been damaged by the action of the defendant. He had transferred from Mr Osmond 50 shares, but in consequence of the action of the defendant, the register was closed to Mr Osmond's transfers. Mr Frater, with knowledge that 100 shares did not belong to Osmond, asked him to give him a transfer for those shares, so that he could euchre the owner. Mr Cooper : To get his own shares back. Mr Cotcer then proceeded to ridicule Mr Cooper's argument that Mr Fleming had lost nothing, and said that he had no doubt that by an expensive method the plaintiff could, through the Supreme Court, cause Mr Frater to transfer the shares back. His Worship said he would reserve judgment on the nonsuit points, and the case was further adjourned. GASteAUX & CRANWELL are tbrtfbw Furniture and Carpets very cheap. Ir»n Bedsteads and Spring Mattresses at greatly reduced prices. Bedding of all kinds ready for delivery. Oil Cloths from Is. square yard. Linoleum from 2s 3d. Blankets ' "sheets, quilts, curtains, and all furnishintr splendid value. Wire Wove Mat tresses much cheaper than they used to bet A strong Iron Bedstead and Wire Wove Mattress for 55s cash. Simple Iron Bedstead and Wire Wove Mattress for 38s cash price. Our goods are carefully packed, eve jr attention paid to prevent damage by Tonsit. Buy all your household goods from s^RLICK and CRANWELL, Cubfe** aakwa. Qu«en street. Auckland' 1