Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Geraldine—Tuesday, April 26,1887.

[Before H. C. S. Baddeley, R.M'., H. W. Moore and A. H. Brisco, Esqrs., J.P.’s. CIVIL CASES. B. Gibson v. W. Clark—Claim 15s. Mr White appeared: for . defendant. B. Gibson, sworn,, said that on the 18th Match, he bought-15 idoz. eggs from Clark. Some weeks before that had bought some from him and sold them in Timaru. The perpm to whom he > sold them bad complained of their being all bad, and said he would not pay for them if he bought another lot like that. When he bought the. 15 doz. from defendant he had guaranteed them to be alli perr fectly sound.: Had taken them to Mr Sharp, storekeeper, Timaru, and when he went in the following week Mr Sharp said they were all bad and he would, not pay for them. Had taken one from the top of the,lot apd found it bad also. :Sa v some half dozen in a dish which Mr Sharp had broken, and they were bad. To the Bench ; did not knpw how to test an egg as to its quality. Had not been long in that line. Had never handled the eggs. Defendant packed them himself. . Had given 10£d for them and sold them i for Is per doz. Had asked defendant for competition and ha had refused to giya him any. To Mr White: f Had told defendant about the first,.lot being, bad and, that Sharp had refused ,ito pay for any more like that. Defendant then said he would guarantee the second lot. Had taken a few other in the some day to another shop. Never told, defendant that,be, had sold the eggs in question to David o,wers. To the Bench; I swear positively that the eggs complained of are the* same eggs I bought from defendant. He guaranteed every one of the second lot. Samuel Sharp, storekeeper, deposed to purchasing lAdoz. on the 19th March from' plaintiff. Had complained about the quality of . some previous ones and had found the second lot bad. Had had five out.pf a dozen of the second'lot brought back To the Bench; Djid not know inhere the eggs originally fame from, bqfc , they were about tbo worst lot he ever saw. For the deffince.Mr Whitoicallecl Margaret Ann Clark, wife of defendant; who, being sworn, said: She sold the 15 doz. eggs to plaintiff on the JBth March. He came in and said he wanted some eggs, would she let him have 20 doz? She told him he should have what were there, and they packed him 15 doz. after her husband oime home; keeping 5 doz. for her own use. Sold the 5 doz. to parties in Geraldine, and had had. no complaints whatever, andjnone of them were brought back. Did not guarantee the eggs. They,.pad never had a complaint.before. To plaintiff; The eggs were: bought during the week. You said you* would want some for, Friday, and Friday was the 18th. Mr Sherratt was there when the eggs were packed. He waited till the eggs were packed and then went out. The eggs were packed a fortnight in salt before you took them away, and they were packed for you the evening yon took them. Do not remember yon speaking about a previous lot of eggs you had from me. You had 16doz. on Feb. Bth, but 1 never heard a complaint about them. It was not that dace when Mr Sherratt was present. To Mr White ; As. a role we pack the eggs in salt as they come in, and then put them into plaintiffs basket when he calls for them.

To the Beach : Mr Clark put them in B»lt.' They were put into Balt as soon as thhy were bought, about a fortnight before plaintiff called for them. William Clark,*defendant, sworn, said he Was not present at the purchase op the eggs by, plaintiff. It was from Mrs Clark he first knew that plaintiff had been in and bought some eggs. Had taken, them out of the salt and put them into chaff for plaintiff on. the 18th March. Never guaranteed them to defendant. Collected the eggs all over the place, and put them into salt as he got them. To plaintiff: Was not there when you made the bargain with Mrs Clark. Never remember you complaining about some eggs you had previously had. Never guarantee every egg in 15 doz. Never give a guarantee. You never, mentioned that you wanted a refund till you summoned me. Would have been willing te make some consideration to you if you bad come to me like a man. To Mr White; Nothing had passed between myself and plaintiff about these eggs. To the Bench ; Plaintiff generally gets eggs from me when I have them. He never complained to, me before, and I am not aware that complaints, have been made by him at my store. Plaintiff toHench; I deal with farmers 1 in the district for eggs. .1 only had'2 doz, from Mr Gregan, and 3 doz. from Mr Guthrie about that time, and then I put them into different boxes and took them to B'lvid Owers.

Plaintiff called Mr C. E. Sherratt, who, being swprn, said, he remembered being at Mr Clark’s when he was packing some eggs. Mr Clark was, taking them out of salt, and Mr Gibson was packing (hernia chaff. The date of his being (frere was earlier.than the 18th March. He believed there were 16doz. packed, then. To Mr White : It would be, fully six weeks.ago. I should not think it wae as far back as Feb. 8< b, 1 think it was between six and eight weeks from now. Mr and Mrs Clark were both there that evening. 1 was waiting for Mr Clark to go ( out with me. When the eggs were finished we went out together. Mr White submitted that it must have been March 18th that Mr Sherratt'*, evidence pointed to.

Mr Baddeley pointed out that Mr Sherralt was almost positive that 16doz. were counted out,, and 16doz. were counted out on Feb, Bjh. Mr White then addressed the Bench submitting that plaintiff was not entitledto recover, as there had been no guarantee giyen with the eggs. The Bench said the evidence in this case was.yery cloar. There was, npt the slightest doubt as to where the eggs came from, and their being bad. Plaintiff should not be at the loss of them. Both parties should have met each other and come to some compromise in the case. Whether there was a guarantee or not they were provisions and therefore there was an implied guarantee that they were wholesome. Judgment would be for plaintiff with costa.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TEML18870428.2.16

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Temuka Leader, Issue 1574, 28 April 1887, Page 4

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,119

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. Temuka Leader, Issue 1574, 28 April 1887, Page 4

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT. Temuka Leader, Issue 1574, 28 April 1887, Page 4

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert