WAITARA.

Taranaki Daily News, 8 November 1915, Page 3

WAITARA.

(From Our Own Correspondent). GUN CLUB. The Waitara Gun Club held a shooting match on Mr. JolPs farm on Thursday. The strong winds which prevailed made shooting difficult, but notwithstanding this some good scores were registered. Mr Roy Limmer gave a creditable performance, and topped the list with thirteen hits out of a possible sixteen, thus winning the trophy (claret jug) presented by Messrs Stewart and Co.

A LAND TRANSACTION. A case of interest to land "agents came before the Stipendiary Magistrate last Wednesday, when Messrs Lund and Sampson sued Charles Goldsmith for £l4, commission on a house sold to Mrs Joshua Jones. Mr Bennett (Roy and Nicholson) appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr Stead for defendant. , Lewis IT. Sampson, of Lund and Sampson, said the firm were instructed by an agreement in writing to sell Mr Goldsmith's property, which had been submitted for sale during the time they had the business in hand. Mr. Jones' son-in-law came to witness and stated that Mr Jones wanted a house in Waitara. Witness made arrangements with Mr Jones, who, in company with his wife and daughter, inspected the house and agreed to buy, but were unable to pay the deposit. At a later date Mrs Jones completed the purchase, dealing direct with Mr Goldsmith. Cross-exam-ined by Mr Stead, Mr Jones said in the first place he was buying the place for his wife. Witness saw Mr Jones and Mr Goldsmith regularly about negotiations, and then heard the property had •been sold privately to Mrs Jones by Mr Goldsmith. The case for the defence was that the transaction was not effected through the agency of the plaintiffs, and, secondly, that no actual authority to sell was given. Chas. Goldsmith, tfie defendant, said that Mr Sampson came to him in April last and asked witness if he would sell his house. Witness replied that he would, and named £460, plus commission, and it. was arranged that Mr. and Mrs Jones should visit the house. Later Mr Sampson called at witness' shop and asked him to sign a paper, but witness refused, saying that he would not bind himself to anybody. Mr Sampson said it was not binding him, and would be signed also by Mr Jones, and it would then be completed, and under these circumstances witness signed. On a later occasion witness asked Mr. Sampson if he thought the sale would take place, and Mr Sampson said he thought not as "Jones was an old messer." Witness then decided to advertise the place. About a week after the advertisement Mrs Jones came to him and asked the price. Witness informed her that it was £4BO, £2O being for commission. Mrs Jones stated that Mr Jones had nothing to do with the transaction, and the commission was then deducted, the sale being ultimately eoneluded. To Mr. Bennet: Ue quoted 41480 to Mrs Jones when she came to him because he did not know whether she had seen Sampson. When he heard it was not so the £2O was taken off. To the Magistrate: Witness did not read the paper which he signed in Mr Sampson's presence, and said he did not see the words "Authority to sell" at the top of the paper. It was not filled in. Joshua Jones said that Mrs Jones bought the place entirely on her own account. When witness* first went to see the house he said he would have to have Mrs Jones' approval. ; His Worship intimated at this stage that he was satisfied the defendant knew what he was signing when he signed the paper in Mr Sampson's presence. Mr Stead consequently, said he would abandon his second line of defence, and quoted various authorities in support of his first contention that the buyer had not been introduced by plaintiffs and were not entitled to commission. Counsel for plaintiffs submitted that the material factor and efficient cause of bringing about the sale was the first introduction. Various authorities were quoted. The magistrate reserved his decision,