RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XIII, Issue 4225, 22 September 1892, Page 3

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

MASTEKTON-THUBSDAY. (Before Colonel Eoberts, 8.M.) Patrick O'Conncll, charged wi drunkenness and who had spent t night in the cells, was discharged wi a caution. CIVIL CASES. Masterton Benevolent Society Wanganui and Patea United D: trict Charitable Aid Board, claim f tho cost of maintaining Henry W liams and family. This case was adjourned until G October, as it was expected that settlement would be arrived at out Court in the meantime. W. B. Buick v. Dan Knight, Pahi tua,—Claitn ou a judgment summon The Magistrate ordered that tl amount should be paid within sevi days of the servile of notice, or th , the defendant should in default 1 for three weeks, ' ' C, Collier v Hapeta Whakamniri claim £1 2s 6d, for a bag of mussel Mr Pownall for plaintiff, Judgmei by confession, with costs. J, Moment v J, Allen, claim, £ 16s 4d, for the difference in value ( barley supplied to defendant and tl substituted quantity and quality r< turned by him, Mr Pownall appeared (or the plair tiff, John Butement deposed that the dt fendant Allen came to him in Augus 1891, for thirty sacks of bade] Eventually the defendant received te: sacks at the price of four shillings bushel,' He was either to pay fo this or return an equivalent in quan tity and quality. The barley was fo seed purposes. His object was to en courage barley-growing in the distrio so that he could buy that grain. M Allen's crop was to bo placed unde offer to him, That is, he was t( submit sample and price. Then i not satisfactory the defendant conic kttll elsewhere. Eventually ,he re"ived ten Backs of grain back fron: Mr Allen, but the quality was in. ferior. It was not useful for lib purpose, and was only worth twe shillings a bushel lo anyone. Defendant offered to take it from him al three shillings, leaving a difference ol n shilling a bushel and also some discrepancy in the quantity, This was defendant's idea of a settlement. He • said that I should havq applied foi more barley from Mr Welch, whe owned the farm on which the barley obtained from me by the defendant was sown, Ho (witness) kept the inferior barley pending other payment, By defendant: I will swear that I mentioned the prico was foul shillings a bushel, I showed you two samples, but I did not eajr that I gave 2s 7d a bushel for one and 2s fid a bushel for the other. I asked yon to go to Mr Welch and get him to deliver the ten Backs lo mo. Ho sent nine Backs of barley and ono of oats. I did not into the corn before I complained. By Mr Pownall: I understood that Mr Welch was to return me the barky instead of Mr Allen, but of equal quality, and I did not agree to take ten sacks of the new crop irrespective of quality, I did not take that risk, The crop was offered to me by Mr Welch, but Mr Allen made me no offer of it. Herbert Welch gave evidenoeto tho effect that the barley was sown on his farm at a time when Mr Allen contemplated buying the property. The negotiation afterwards fell through. Tho quality of the seed barley was good, Ho offered to return the ten sacks, and accordingly let Mr Butement have that quantity under order from the delendant. The crop which came up was very poor, and was damaged by tbo weather, It was not as eood as the seed barley sown. The balance of the seed was sold on liis (witness 1 ) own aocount to Mr Caselberg for two shillings a Ski. . Frederick John Butement swore that ho saw ten sacks of barley delivered to the defendant. Mis father Bold similar barley at four shillings a bushels at that time. John Allen, the defendant, deposed that tho plaintiff agreed to supply seed barley to Bnyone growing it in the diatriot, The latter said bis terms were; " Return the same quantity of barley as I supply and give me the offer of the crop. I'll tako a hundred bushels at market value," When Mr j Butement knew that his negotiation for Welch's proparty bad fallen through, be asked him (defendant) to arrango with Mr Wololi to return the ten sacks of corn. That was tho only requirement he expressed. Tho corn returned was worth considerably more than tho seed sown, and he was will! ing to give three shillings s busbelfor a similar quantity. It was worth at least 6s a quarter more than that originally supplied. Mr Butement afterwards asked him for some comomsation, This he refused, as the Jpsement bad been carried out, _By Mr Pownall: lam prepared to give three shillings per bushel now for the barley grown on Welch's property. Mr Pownall at this stage asked for an adjournment until two o'clock, so that defendant could buy tbo ton &aoks of barley at that price. His olient was willing to give credit for tho sum it realised, and the amount could go as a poßt set-off to a portion of the claim. The Court accordingly adjourned until two o'clook,