SELLING A HERD.

Taranaki Daily News, 8 December 1920, Page 5

SELLING A HERD.

NEGOTIATIONS FALL THROUGH. VENDOR CLAIMS DAMAGES. Negotiations for the sale of a dairj herd, which subsequently fell through, were the basis of an action in the Su- | preme Court, New Plymouth, vosterday, ! wherein Wilfred B. Laurent, of Hawera ( (Mr. F. C. Spratt), sought to recover jfrom Albert Kowe, of Eltham (Mr. P. O'Dea), the sum or £ll9 f>s 9d special damages, and £25 general damages, for breach of agreement. Defendant counter-claimed for the 3um of £l5O damages through loss of profits. In stating- the case for plaintiff, Mr. Spratt said that Laurent had a herd of 70 cows, which he offered for sale, instructing an agent named Bosley, in the employ of Wilson and Co., of Hawera, to sell. Some time prior to this Bowe iiad seen the cows at Whakamara, and Bosley later brought him out to see the cows at Laurent's farm at Tokaora, Hawera. After other inspections some finality was come to, when ' plaintiff said he would take £2l per head and allow a pick of the best sixty out of the herd. Bowe signed a sale note on July 3, and on July 10 Laurent also signed. The cows were taken to plaintiff's Campbell Boad farm, where he had a sharemilker, and instructions were given to the sharemilker's son in the matter of tending the cows, the order being that the stock should be kept at night iu a paddock of 20 acres, including five acres of turnips, and that during the day they should be grazed on the roadside. The road was very little used and provided an abundance of feed. On July 12 defendant went to Laurent's farm, in company with Bosley, but when he saw the cattle he refused to make his pick. Laurent knew of nothing' in the ea6e of the cattle that would make any alteration in their condition, and there was none, though they were altered in their appearance. The reasons for this change were, firstly, the fact that the stock had just been put on to a change of feed, and secondly, that during the week there had been exceptionally severe winter weather. The cows'in appearance looked* what dairy farmers called "tucked up," which was a term denoting poor looking as the result of weather conditions. Counsel said that Laurent took out certain witnesses to see the cattle on Julv 19, and they were then in better condition than when Howe saw them. After the repudiation of the agreement the cows were sold by auction on the first day on which a fljcture could he made. In order to sell the 80 the plaintiff had to offer the lot, lest lie would be accused of keeping out the best ones. The herd averaged £l9 13s fid at the sale, the GO making the highest price averaging £2l 4s. The damages claimed were based on the difference between the average price received and tjie £2l which was agreed upon. Counsel said the questions for tfo Court were whether the defendant was entitled to repudiate or not, and what damages if any were due to plaintiff.

_ Evidence was given by plaintiff, Wilfrerl Laurent. $ Under cross-examination by Mr. O'Dea he stated that the top price at the sale was £3l, though some cows fetched only £7 and one price was as low at £3. Other witnesses for plaintiff were Charles fioqdson, A. D. Turner, C. F. Stokes, A. J. Bnrtt. and S. J. Pepperell. The contention tor the defence was that Rowe could not take delivery owing to the low condition into which the cows had got. Tt was also pointed out that Laurent subsequently sold hi* herd without loss, and therefore suffered no damage. Evidence was given by L. and W Pepperell, J. H, Slight, Arthur Bisley, A. Copplestone and the defendant, A. Rowe. A conclusion to the case was reached at !l p.m., when by consent of counsel for both parties judgment was entered for the. defendant on the claim and for plaintiff on the counter-claim, each side to pay its own costs.