PICTURESQUE ATLAS CASES

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XIII, Issue 4026, 3 February 1892, Page 2

PICTURESQUE ATLAS CASES

Bowerman Bhos v. Harrison. The plaintiffs in this case were nonsuited with costs, Same t. McLeod. This was a case in which Alexander HcLeod, sawmiller, ot the Opaki, was sued for £lolos, for forty-eight parts ot the Atlas. Mr Pownall, who appeared for the plaintiffs, read printed reports of County Courtises heard in Australia, which were in favour of the Company. Mr Beard submitted that these reports were valueless, as County Court judges had no rnoro status than District Court judges. The evidence of the agent Bowerman, taken at Duuedin, and of Met* calf, taken at Chriscclmrcli, was read.

Alexander McLeod, defendant, stated that in June, 1890, Metcalf went to his mill, He called at the liouse, was invited in, and had a oup of tea. On going out to the mill afterwards, he told the witness and the hands that he was canvassing for the Picturesque Atlas of New Zealand. He made no mention of Australasia, Metcalf said the work was to be published at Dunedin and written by Dr toewman, It was to come out in monthly parts, but it was optional how many parte defendant took, He could take one or more' numbers at five shillings each, The first part was to be issued in October, On seeing tho patron's list containing the names of nearly all the leading settlers of the "Valley he attached his name to it. Ho was perfectly certain that he signed no other document besides the patron's list. He certainly did not sign the contract slip produced, Tho agent, Bowerman, had oalled on him with the work and showed him a signature which lie at once repudiated. He told the agent that although the Company were a pack of scoundrels he would take the maximum number that the agent had mentioned—l - provided he got a clean receipt, He had denounced the signature shown him by Mr Jagor as a forgery. By Mr Pownall: He had offered to take the. twelve parts because he did not wish to go to Court. He would not have come to Court at all if lie was not positive that he had not given an order for the work.

Thomas Wyeth, sawmill employee, deposed that he had seen Metcalf at the mill. He saw Mr M'Leod sign the patron's list, but nothing else, If he had signed anything else witness would havo been sure to have seen him do so.

By Mr Pownall: He would swear that the defendant signed his name to one dooument only. William King, benohman at Mr M'Leoil's mill, and Matthew StevenSon, a bushman, gave corroborative evidence,

George Spices, sworn, stated that he was preseot when the agent Bowerman called upon Mr M'Leod and showed him a signature, Mr M'Leod repudiated the signature and said it was not his.

Henry H, Smith, manager of the Bank of Australasia, called as a rebutting witness, said he was well acquainted with the signature of Mr M'Leod, The signature on both the contract slip and the patrou's list was in bis opinion that of the defendant. He would pass a oheque bearing the signature of the contraot, Henry Metcalf, sworn, stated that the defendant had signed tho contract on some timber in the mill. Ho did not think that Wyeth or any other saw or heard what transpired between himself and Mr M'Leod, Mt Beard called the Bailiff o£ the Coart to show that the expert evidence of Mr Smith was not reliable, His Worship said he would treat this case the same as the last one, and entered a nonsuit, with costs, The Court then adjourned till next day, WEDNESDAY Same v. P. Lee, This waß a claim for £lO 10s for forty«eight numbers of the Picturesque Atlas. The evidence taken on commission composed the case for the plaintiff.

For the defence Frederick Ler deposed that Metcalf bail called upon htm at Wangaehu some time before 20th March, 1890. He was working in the garden when Metcalf came up A man named Bock, who had since died in the Hospital, was present at tho time. Metcalf told him that he could take one or more numbers of the Atlas, as he thought fit. He said the Atlas m coming out in monthly parts at fire shillings a part, and that there would he altogether fourteen numbers. Witness was asked to sign his name to a dooument containing other names and he did ao, Ho signed one paper only, and lie would positively swear that he did not sign tho contraot form, He Lad not since seen Metcalf or any other agent of Messrs Bowerman Bros. Certain books had been left at Weraiti, but this waa not his residence or abode. Charles Augustus Tabnteau, man- | agar of. the Bank of Aostralasia jn Masterton, called by Mr Pownall, stated that lis believed the signatures on both the contract form and patron's list were those of Mr tea. By Mr'Bear<j: If Mr Lee said thf signature on tjje contact wghot bis

lie would not think it was. He had always found Mr Lo? particularly honest. Mr. Beard pointed ont that delivery had. not been commanced within the twelve months specified in the con* tract. Mr Pownall replied that deliyery had been tendered by Mr Bowerman, The Court was then adjourned for an hour to permit His Worship to peruse the evidence 'taken on cam* mission for the plaintiff, ■* On resuming, His Worship at?led that h« had decided to nousuitthe plaintiffs, as in the other oases. The evidence of the expert witnesses was not sufficient to convince him that the signature was that of the defendant. He would like to remark further that in these cases the defendants had been drawn from all classes of tbe com' manity, and it seemed strange that they should be so emphatic as to what they signed. In future he would re« quire more evidence than that of the agentsto convince him that the signatures were oorrect. Mr Pownall asked if this decision would govern cases, where defendants were not emphatio one way- or the other.. His Worship would not express aa opinion on this point, SAME V DAVID DONALD. This was a case similar to the pro-, vioua one. Tho defendant, called by Mr Pownall, stated that tbo signature to the conli'aot wnsnot his. H 6 < would absolutely and positively sweajM this without any hesitation. The evidence taken for the plaintiffs on commission was put in, In consideration of what Hia Worship hod stated in the previous case, Mr Pownall asked for a nonsuit, which was granted.

Same v. Donovan. Tho defendant in this case denying the signature, a' nonsuit was also granted on the application of Mr Pownall.