MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 112, 9 May 1903, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Fsiday, Bth May.— Before Mr R, L. Stanford, S,M. INTERESTING SHIPPING CASE, W. J. Mf-cßwynolds v. Northern Shippit g Company ; claim £ii 2s. j Mr S anford, S.M., gave tha following written judgment in thin - | The fat ts of this oise are as f ;!lo .• s: | (hi plaintiff, through Mr Newton [ .King, o. deied f/ona tho Ge\r Meat' | Company (Levin & 0 .) eight tons of! bonedust, to bj delivered at Opunake.' The o.der was execu ed oa Novemb?) 21st las', and the manure put on board the Huiii, ta'irjgto Wanganu'. On the 29 h Nov.ai'. era receipt was givet, at Wangar.ui by ilia imte of the Gair Icch to' the Ra lwiy Depigment for the said 80 sa' k-', which wei'-s ciuly put on board 'he Gairlooh, a general cargo ve sel trading b.tneen Wonganui and Onthurga atd int'rmeditte ports, of wl.ioh Opun ke was on"! Tho Giiilocb was wricked ut Ojkura on January 6th, and her cargo was sold byauc'ionon February 9.h. Oa the r c.ip' giver by tiie mate are no ixcrptiocs tuch as are usu illy found on shipping LOtejand bills of ladirg, anl I do not think it can be contended th.it tho c"'ndi ion= on Levin Oo.'s shipping noto to Wangatui can bo held to be tra>sfe:red by implication to ths recsipt glv.n by tho said mite (f i he G irl.cb to the Railway Djfartaiecit. As ac. nsi quencj the Northern S.S. Co must be held to be common cairierp, and su' j act to al! tie li biliti-- 8 of common cani?iv, i.e , " apart f;om express contract he is witlrncert-iinexcep'ior 8 absolutely r. sponsible for tha safety of the goods whil fthey lemain in his nscarrir/' Ctrver p.2, Gilies, J s ys "in the ciso cf common carriers, howerer, the me e f n.t of Lou-d 1 very rais s a presutnp'd n of npg'i .olc.' whish haf to b'e r, buteJ by tho crlier." St pies v. Joseph 6 N.Z.L.B. th. 251. B,van (n regligence summar.sfs the law t' us : "It go.ds are loss cr damaged wl ile te : rg carried by eea wi h the comrtlon Uw liability cf a common carrier, the c immon l iw c trier is l'aole in any event unhss 'hat is he br'ngs himself within tho common law exceptions if tha Ac", of Goiorthe King's enemi a" The evidence in this cise show l , moreov r, affirmatively, negligence on the part cf the Northern S.S. Coy., since the rnanur• in quesion was once carried pist fcl e port cf Opunake without discharge, although certain were discharged on the Gairloch's visit to the por*, and that on another occasion betwe n'he date of shipment, v'z., November 27th, and the d-te of the wreck, J tcuary 6 b, the Gaiil;ch passtd Opun.ke but tha*; the minura in qu-stion was tot oti b a>d, hwing been difefcarged on the whuf at Onthungn. Jfc was al o elowD that the OourS of It qui y into the wreck of tteGiiiloch fiuad tho cap'ain to be guil y of n-gligence and su-pendod his certificate. Ellis v. Turner, 5 Revised | Reports 444, is authority for saying I tha*; the mixim respondeat superior apIp'ies as between misteo mid i-hip-jowr.er. The site of the Ga : rlocYa 'cargo on the 9th of Feb ua-y took I p'aca without any no'ice bung giv n to the plain*iff, who lived near the loca'i y of tha wreck, and uader these ciruumstmces the offeree of conversion h clear from the nuthoritirs, which declare tha*-, b?foro so! in«, 'he oncer of the £o"ds must be communicited tufh. Brett, L. J., Fays: " Whether the are of a perishable ratu o or r.ot, if tho mas o. has an i ppor uni y of cominuuiciting with the o*ne.' b-fore they ac utlly'perish, he cannot sell without communicv ing wi h th=) own r and | obtaining his directions," Acatos v. Burrs, 3 L.R., Es 282, It is tiue this decision refers to a mist r'd b vie, but if a master tniy cot a fortiori a ship owner miy not eel), as was the cisi here, where tha goods p ore not ptr'sha .le, where the sale was delayed a month af:er tfce wrrclr, dudng wh'ch salvige . operations we-e go : ng on, without first onfa ; ning diivcuijcs from tho own-r. Williams, J., s'atea the law in tho mat'er thus : " If a m\n h;s the go dof arothpr i i his custody, i.nd tells tleai wi'hou" tho authoiis ti.ri, cx pre-s, or imp'i d of tha owner, the sab is wrongful, and it lies upon tha person ; felling to show that the sale in th s circumstances io which it ivn* mado wis in fast authorised." Holmes v. Union S.S. Co., 13 N.Z., L.R., SGS. On all the grounds theiefore slleged by c.unsel for plaintiff, tb« pMntiff must', I think, succeed. Judgment will, therefore, be for plain'iff for ,£44 2 J , and costs. j The costs amounted to .£4 4s. |