E.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume VI, Issue 1853, 1 December 1884, Page 2

E.M. COURT.

MASTERTON-MONDAY.

(Before H. 8. Wardell, R.M.)

Constable J. Healey v. James Bradley. The defendant, a lad, was charged with furious riding. George Morris, bootmaker, deposed that on Friday the 21st the defendant, was riding at a gentle trot' : round a corner and .knocked a child ,down. Bradley was .not looking whore he.was going. 01 the thing would not-havooc-' curred. The child was not hurti., ' .: At the suggestion of the Court the charge was altered to one of riding round a corner at a faster pace than a walk, and defendant pleading guilty to the amended charge was fined one shilling. PaytonvH. W. Parker-Debt £3 6s, Judgment for amount and costs.

Payton v T. W. Foster-Debt £2 Us, £1 paid in, and judgment for balance and costs,

Lowes k lorns v.Angus Fraser.— Claim £23 2s 6d. Mr Bunny for plaintiffs, Mr Beard for defendant,

Mr Buuny, in opening the case, that a Mr Hammond had authorised the plaintiffs to dispose of a horse known as Dainty Davie." Subsequently defendant requested them to purchase the horse from Mr Hammond on his behalf. The -transaction was concluded,"tlie price being £BS. Afterwards defendant desired to withdraw from the arrangement and would not take delivery of the horse. Notice was then given to him that if he did not take delivery the horse would be sold at his risfc The horse was so sold at a loss of £23.

Mr Beard % the defence alleged that plaintiffsjwere not authorised bydefendant to purchase the horse on his accotmt. -v:

W. deposed, that defendant canievto him and said he had written to.'Hammond asking him the price of the horse. He then asked witnessto writa-'tb Mr Hammond and .make him an oiler of £BS for the horse. Witness .wrote"/-to Mr Hammond accordingly. Hisfirm arranged toudyance defendant one-half of the purchase money. Mr -Hammond replied accepting the offerof Lowes <fc lorns, provided that Frazer.paid theircommission, Subsequently Fraser informed witness that he could nob-take the horse as he had been disappointed in getting in money. Witness agreed to ask Mr Hammond if he would let Frazer off. As Mr Hammond refused to do this witness served Frazer with a notice, b'razer replied that as no money had passed betweeniiiem he did not consider the bargain binding. Witness paid Hammond for l ,he horse on August 26th the time of delivery. The horse was sold on September 3rd to Mr E. MoEwen for the sum of LBO. It was paid for by a promisory note which was signed by Mr "Fraser and endorsed by Mr McEweh. To Mr Beard: He did not tell Fraser when.he first came to him that Hammond would not take less than LBS for the-horse. His firm were acting as agents for both the vendor and purchaser; It was quito a common occurrence foragents to act in a double capacity. Fraser did not tell him that he would not take the horse because he found that it was about sixteen years of age, instead of fourteen. . Joseph-Joms deposed that his firm had f « Dainty Davie" to sell on behalf of Mr Hammond. Defendant came to witness and asked if any reply had been received from Mr Hammond to his offer! He teplied in the affirmative, and read to him a letter dated 23rd of June, and, after some hesitation, Fraser agreed to give the price and pay the oommission of five per cent, They telegraphed to Mr Hammond to say that they had sold. About a fortnight after Fraser came to him and-said he would not be able to take the horse, as lie could not find the money. He told defendant it was too late to' back out then, He wired on behalf of Frasbr to Hammond to annul the bargain, and the reply was, " Cannot allow your client to ory off, have lost a purchaser through it," He told Fraser their only course would be to get the horse down and sell at his risk. He replied' "It's no use, you can't take the breeks off a Highlandman," Notice was given Fraser of the arrival of the horse and that it would be sold on his account unless he took delivery of it. The horse was ultimately sold by auction, Mr Fraser being present when it was knocked down. The result of the sale was notified to Mr Fraser. By Mr Beard; It did not occur to him at the time that the proper course to take when Fraser refused to take the horse was to telegraph to Hammond that fact, and his firm had not done so, but had taken delivery of the horse themselves. Edward McEwen gave evidence that he purchased Dainty Davie at Lowes <fc lorns' yards on September 3rd, for £Bo' and paid for it by a promissory note drawn by Frazer in favor of witness and endorsed by witness, The horse had not been resold. It was being travelled by Mr. Fraser who would be paid for the same at the end of the season. This concluded the case fqr the plaintiff. Mr Beard for the defence held that plaintiffs must be non-suited on the evidence. They had sworn to being agents for Mr Fraser and all their actions went to prove that they were agents for Mr Hammond. Mr Bunny argued against thenom suit.